‘Ladies Man,” read the lead-story headline at the Huffington Post on February 12, plastered above a photo of a smiling Senator Marco Rubio (R., Fla.). “GOP Savior Votes No on Violence Against Women Act. . . . Hours before State of the Union Response.”
Welcome to the scorched-earth phase of the Democrats’ “war on women” campaign, and the beginning of a ruthless offensive to hold their Senate majority, and possibly to retake the House, in 2014.
Democrats have nearly perfected the following exercise in cynical electioneering: 1) introduce legislation; 2) title it something that appeals to the vast majority of Americans who have no interest in learning what is actually in the bill, e.g., the “Violence Against Women Act”; 3) make sure it is sufficiently noxious to the GOP that few Republicans will support it; 4) vote, and await headlines such as “[GOP Lawmaker] Votes No On Violence Against Women Act”; 5) clip and use headline in 30-second campaign ad; and 6) repeat.
The strategy is abetted by a compliant press. This dynamic was on full display during last year’s presidential campaign, when ABC News anchor and former Clinton aide George Stephanopoulos brought up a 1965 Supreme Court ruling on contraception during a GOP primary debate, just days before the White House announced new guidelines regarding the contraceptive mandate under Obamacare. It was also in evidence when a Huffington Post reporter asked Mitt Romney’s advisers whether their boss supported the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, shortly before Senate Democrats initiated their push for legislation called the Paycheck Fairness Act; the awkward exchange prompted serviceableheadlines, such as “Does Mitt Romney Support Equal Pay For Women?” and “Democrats Slam Romney Waffling on Fair Pay Act.”
The recent Huffington Post treatment of Senator Rubio is merely a taste of what is come. Certainty, the Democratic party’s plans for using this playbook extend well beyond 2014.
Of course, one should not overstate the impact of the “war on women” on the outcome of the most recent election, but it certainty had one. “It’s important to point out why the White House is doing this,” says Sabrina Schaeffer, executive director of the Independent Women’s Forum: “Unmarried women. They are a critical base for Democrats, and the basis for the ‘war on women.’ What’s concerning is that it worked.” Indeed, unmarried women backed Obama over Romney by a whopping 68 percent to 30 percent margin. Issues such as contraception and equal pay certainly helped create this gap. If Democrats can motivate these same voters to turn out in 2014, admittedly no small task, Republicans could suffer.
What is clear is that Democrats believe they have found a winning strategy, and plan to replicate it on all fronts in order to maximize their chances for success in 2014.
Senator Kay Hagan (D., N.C.), easily one of the most vulnerable incumbents facing reelection next year, sent out a campaign e-mail Wednesday calling on House Republicans to pass the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). “Lives are literally at stake,” Hagan wrote. “The health and safety of women has to come before petty political games.”
Republicans understand the game that is being played. “It’s been perfectly clear that Democrats are more interested in preserving a political issue than actually help stopping violence against women,” says a House GOP aide.
However, Republicans opponents of the bill are not especially eager to explain their position. When they do, they usually cite concern over a provision that would allow Native American officials to try non-Indian defendants in tribal courts. In this case, as in most other iterations of the “war on women,” the validity of the GOP’s concern is significantly outweighed by its tediousness in the eyes of most voters.
Democrats, on the other hand, have a more straightforward, albeit painfully cynical, message to present to voters. “Violence against women should not be a partisan issue,” Chris Harris, a spokesman for the left-wing political action committee American Bridge, recently toldNational Journal. “That is an easy message to get across, even to people who don’t follow the legislative process. It’s like opposing the Clean Air or Clean Water Acts.” For those interested, American Bridge has compiled a neat little brief on “Marco Rubio’s Record on Women,” which includes a quote from Tupac Shakur, the late West Coast rapper and author of songs such as “California Love” and “Fake Ass Bitches.”
Some Republicans, such as Representative Shelley Moore Capito (W. Va.), are calling on colleagues to support VAWA. Perhaps tellingly, Capito is also running to succeed retiring Democratic senator Jay Rockefeller in 2014.
Such explicitly women-oriented bills as VAWA and the Paycheck Fairness Act are not the only items queued up in the Democrats’ 2014 arsenal. The policy proposals Obama has offered since beginning his second term — gun control, universal preschool, the minimum-wage hike, immigration reform — may not be specifically targeted toward women voters, but the White House is keenly aware of what the polls are saying. “These are issues that play very, very well with women voters, and further put the Republicans in the corner,” Politico’s well-sourced White House reporter Glenn Thrush said on MSNBC last week. Universal preschool is an especially favorable issue, Thrush said, because “chicks dig it.”