|
|
||||
|
9/26/00
9:25 a.m. Robert
A. George is an editorial page writer |
||||
|
Now, there's no way anyone can compete with John McCain in the biography department. However, Lazio has taken up the soft-money cudgel and, just as the irascible senator promised to do with Al Gore, is beating Hillary Clinton "like a drum" with it. It's way too soon to say whether this will translate into votes for Lazio, but Hillary has clearly been put on the defensive. While that is partly attributable to developments occurring separately from this campaign, if Lazio hadn't stayed focused, he wouldn't be in the position he is now to take advantage. The current shift began during the September 13 Lazio-Clinton debate. Everyone admits that the electric moment occurred when Lazio stepped away from his podium, with an "agreement" in hand that would force both campaigns to prohibit using soft money. He demanded that Hillary sign it. She demurred, asking Lazio to get signed agreements from various outside groups who were running ads against her. Now, let's be clear here. There are really only two groups interested in quote-banning-unquote soft money: "good government" groups like Center for Public Integrity and the media. Republicans hate it because soft-money bans never include unions; conservatives hate it because of the limitations that it places on free speech.
That said, Lazio's move is great politics especially in New York.
Mike Murphy made the joke during the presidential primaries that, since
George W. Bush resorted to his base religious conservatives
in South Carolina, McCain would have to rely on But, Murphy understands that pushing soft-money as an issue here in New York is a smart move. In a real sense, it splits Hillary Clinton's base separating her from both national and local media which in this case, means the New York Times and the Daily News. The latter paper offered the most stinging editorial the day after the debate, "Her refusal to sign the deal unless Lazio produced signed statements denouncing soft money 'from all your friends' was feeble and transparent. And until she does take the pledge, she will remain the Queen of Dirty Money." That editorial gave Lazio the neutral-observer encouragement he needed. He brandished it over the next several days, to great effect. The phrase, "Queen of Dirty Money," had a certain ring to it. Lazio was also able to benefit from something which could not have been predicted White House Sleepover II. The news that more than 400 "friends and supporters" of the Clintons had stayed over at the White House since she officially jumped into the race last summer played perfectly into Lazio's hands. Slight digression: to be accurate, one should never say "something which could not have been predicted" when it comes to the Clintons (and, by extension, Al Gore). The Clinton-campaign template cannot be overwritten. It's never a matter of if another fundraising-type scandal occurs, only when. This is not to be confused with the Clinton-personal template which demands that another bimbo eruption occur. Similarly, the Gore template demands that the candidate have another personal "exaggeration." The regularity of these occurrences suggest that the Republicans would have figured out how to take advantage of them. In this regard, Lazio's timing has been perfect. Over the weekend, the two campaigns agreed to prohibit the state and national parties from running radio or television ads against the other party's candidate. Get-out-the-vote and direct-mail spending will be allowed. Lazio and Clinton have also asked their non-party allies to hold back as well. So, Hillary has been forced, politically, to cut off her nose to spite her face. She was rolling in more soft money than Lazio was. She has clearly benefited from all the negative advertising that the state Democratic Party has been rolling against Rick Lazio (one of the more effective ones has a camera following around "ordinary citizens" most of them female with a voice-over asking them if they "knew" Lazio's real record; the voice-over promptly provides various examples of important votes Lazio cast). Those ads definitely helped increase Lazio's negatives. But Hillary didn't have much of a choice. She couldn't appear to flinch. The debate over soft money strikes at her greatest vulnerability her credibility. While the CBS/New York Times poll has her up by nine points, the Marist survey has the race tied. The "credibility/trust" issue still has the capacity to cause her campaign to collapse. That issue has a far greater saliency in this race than it does in the presidential contest. For one thing, Gore is running more than fifteen points ahead of Hillary in the state. By the way, while conservatives might dislike the Lazio/McCain basic underlying argument soft-money is inherently bad he has actually raised this is in a responsible manner. Unlike McCain, he is not making a legislative ban the centerpiece of his campaign. Instead, he has just developed a negotiated agreement between the two candidates. Now, both liberal and conservative organizations have cried foul that their speech is being limited which it is. But, this "voluntary" approach by candidates is preferable to a blatantly unconstitutional ban. Besides, it's not as if the outside groups are going to be quiet forever. It's only a matter of time before the agreement is broken. In the meantime, the ghost of the McCain insurgency has definitely given Lazio a boost by making him look clean and effective. |
||||
|
|
||||
|