In a move that's roiling
the political world David Broder's
column, a crew of ancient has-beens is threatening to support Mike Bloomberg's run for the presidency if the current crop of candidates don't spell out their plans to create a "government of national unity." Digby says much of what needs to be said
here. But her eloquent outrage underplays the almost charming mix of naivete and self-deception underlying this cozy enterprise. In his article on the threat, David Broder says:
The list of acceptances suggests that the group could muster the financial and political firepower to make the threat of such a candidacy real. Others who have indicated that they plan to attend the one-day session include William S. Cohen, a former Republican senator from Maine and defense secretary in the Clinton administration; Alan Dixon, a former Democratic senator from Illinois; Bob Graham, a former Democratic senator from Florida; Jim Leach, a former Republican congressman from Iowa; Susan Eisenhower, a political consultant and granddaughter of former president Dwight D. Eisenhower; David Abshire, president of the Center for the Study of the Presidency; and Edward Perkins, a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
Hey look! It's a bunch of people who don't matter! What constituency does Susan Eisenhower control? What sort of leverage does Jim Leach -- who was beaten in the 2006 election -- wield? Does an anxious nation
really turn its eyes to Edward Perkins?Of course not. This set of elderly white eminences can count on affection from a small group of DC's political elite, and is mistaking that recognition for actual power. Alan Dixon and William Cohen do not have the clout to themselves pass legislation, nor lift the objections of the forces impeding reform. What they do have is David Broder's home phone number, and so can expect a laudatory column detailing their efforts. But this, right here, is the peak of their power. And that's the problem. One could imagine a political movement dedicated to a more functional vision of governance and willing to apply real pressure, both financial and political, to those in the system who insist on obstructing needed reforms. It would be an interest group for reform, just as there now exist interest groups for lower taxes, and less regulation, and all the rest. The model exists, and with sufficient money and energy, could be easily adapted to good government concerns. But that movement would need the buy-in of existing political actors, tangible constituencies, corporate backers, and a ruthless vision. It would need to be a long-term -- dare I say Leninist? -- strategy for changing the system.
