Politics & Policy

Dinosaur Conventions

Setting up the 2012 Democratic National Convention at the Time Warner Cable Arena in Charlotte
Maybe it’s time to end the subsidies for these overblown extravaganzas.

‘The closest thing to eternal life is a government program,” Ronald Reagan once said. I suspect that today he might single out the $136 million in taxpayer subsidies that go to the two major parties for their national conventions. Established in the 1970s when people thought conventions might still decide something, the subsidies keep flowing and are even indexed for inflation. They now amount to welfare for corporate and union interests and the political class — providing the infrastructure for wheeling, dealing, and frolicking.

Few people suggest that the parties should abandon conventions completely, but the subsidies prop up an archaic structure that needs retooling.

“Some pundits lament the demise of the old conventions,” writes Michael Barone, co-author of The Almanac of American Politics. “But they couldn’t be revived without banning long-distance telephone, the Internet, and jet travel.”

#ad#For most voters, the conventions today are increasingly an anachronism. Only 14 percent of people told pollster Scott Rasmussen that they wanted more than the nightly one hour of prime-time coverage the broadcast networks aired. Even with such limited coverage, ratings were down 30 percent or more this year from the 2008 Republican convention. Only one in five unaffiliated voters bothered to tune in for more than a few minutes.

In theory, about three-quarters of the taxpayer funding is earmarked for security, but that money is fungible — it makes the two overblown extravaganzas possible. Security for presidents, vice presidents, congressional leaders, and presidential nominees is paid for separately by the Secret Service and is provided wherever those figures go.

Some political players are blowing the whistle and challenging the taxpayer subsidies. Senator Tom Coburn (R., Okla.), a deficit hawk, calls the gatherings “summertime parties” and says having them financially fend for themselves would demonstrate “strong leadership to getting our budget crisis in control.” 

Exposed to sober analysis, the practice of lavishing taxpayer-funded largesse on convention luminaries cannot be justified when the public is in uproar over abuses such as the General Services Administration’s spending $823,000 on a “team building” meeting in Las Vegas.

Indeed, it appears that conventions are slowly shrinking in length — if only because of intervention from Mother Nature. In 2008, Representative David Dreier of California, the Republican convention’s parliamentarian, developed an alternate plan under which all the legally required business at that year’s convention in St. Paul, Minn., could be conducted in a few hours in the event that the delegates and officials from the Gulf Coast had to go home to deal with Hurricane Gustav. This year, Democrats will conduct their business in three days instead of four. Republicans in Tampa found they could chop off a day from their schedule of activities with hardly anyone’s noticing.

Some politicians say conventions would shrink even more were it not for the government subsidy. “The staging overshadows the politics,” Senator Ron Johnson (R., Wis.) told a group of National Review editors last week. Count House Speaker John Boehner as another skeptic: “These are very expensive propositions to put on,” he told a group of reporters at a Christian Science Monitor lunch last week. He predicted that both Republicans and Democrats “will assess whether this type of convention is worth the tremendous resources put into it.”

I’ll go further: Whoever is elected president this November will have to go through such stringent belt-tightening when it comes to discretionary budget items that the convention subsidy will land on the chopping block. Any political party that dares to oppose getting rid of the subsidy will be in the crosshairs of voters.

So maybe Reagan will be proved wrong after all and the convention subsidy won’t be eternal. All of us will then discover that the two major parties and their allies can pay for whatever kind of convention makes sense to them without taxpayers having to foot much of the bill. Indeed, that’s just the way it was done from the time when the first convention was held — in 1832 to nominate Andrew Jackson — right up through the 1970s.

 John Fund is national-affairs columnist for NRO.

Most Popular

White House

The Trivialization of Impeachment

We have a serious governance problem. Our system is based on separation of powers, because liberty depends on preventing any component of the state from accumulating too much authority -- that’s how tyrants are born. For the system to work, the components have to be able to check each other: The federal and ... Read More
Elections

Put Up or Shut Up on These Accusations, Hillary

Look, one 2016 candidate being prone to wild and baseless accusations is enough. Appearing on Obama campaign manager David Plouffe’s podcast, Hillary Clinton suggested that 2016 Green Party candidate Jill Stein was a “Russian asset,” that Republicans and Russians were promoting the Green Party, and ... Read More
Culture

Feminists Have Turned on Pornography

Since the sexual revolution of the 1960s, the feminist movement has sought to condemn traditional sexual ethics as repressive, misogynistic, and intolerant. As the 2010s come to a close, it might be fair to say that mainstream culture has reached the logical endpoint of this philosophy. Whereas older Americans ... Read More
PC Culture

Defiant Dave Chappelle

When Dave Chappelle’s Netflix special Sticks & Stones came out in August, the overwhelming response from critics was that it was offensive, unacceptable garbage. Inkoo Kang of Slate declared that Chappelle’s “jokes make you wince.” Garrett Martin, in the online magazine Paste, maintained that the ... Read More
U.S.

‘Texodus’ Bodes Badly for Republicans

‘I am a classically trained engineer," says Representative Will Hurd, a Texas Republican, "and I firmly believe in regression to the mean." Applying a concept from statistics to the randomness of today's politics is problematic. In any case, Hurd, 42, is not waiting for the regression of our politics from the ... Read More
White House

The Impeachment Defense That Doesn’t Work

If we’ve learned anything from the last couple of weeks, it’s that the “perfect phone call” defense of Trump and Ukraine doesn’t work. As Andy and I discussed on his podcast this week, the “perfect” defense allows the Democrats to score easy points by establishing that people in the administration ... Read More