Democracy for Vancouver

Readers of The Columbian today were treated to a giant 3/4 page advertisement by Friends for Mike McGavick telling us how, if we choose him over incumbent Maria Cantwell, he will stop the rising national debt, rescue us from The Terrorists, and save Social Security without privatization. There is so much sleight of hand in this ad it’s difficult to choose where to begin.

Let’s start with his Republican party affiliation. It’s virtually non-existent in the ad, only a little “R” set in parenthesis in the bottom corner below his name. Is it possible that he wants voters to forget that it is his own party that is responsible for our country’s astronomical national debt, a “War on Terror” which has made us far less safer, and Social Security no closer to solvency at current benefit levels? It must be difficult to campaign under the party banner while simultaneously distancing oneself from it. Given the historical low approval ratings of this Republican led Congress it is little wonder that McGavick is not the only Republican to cut and run from his political identity on the campaign trail this election year. The sublimation of his party also makes it easier to package this creepy manifesto under the theme “Anxious times.” Where FDR declares, “We have nothing to fear except fear itself,” Republicans still have nothing to sell but fear itself.

McGavick’s “Plan of Action” (PoA) for the budget is little more than platitudes about reducing spending with a sprinkling of trivial statistics about our record national debt. It is uncertain whether McG actually believes that a junior Senator could break his Republican colleagues of their addiction to earmarks as he claims in his ad, especially that of Alaska’s Ted Stevens, otherwise known as the “King of Pork.” He wants to freeze spending at current levels but does not identify what spending he would cut; similarly with federal programs “that don’t work,” he gives no hint of which ones he would give the ax. He cites a factoid from The National Taxpayers Union which claims his opponent, Senator Maria Cantwell (he won’t divulge her party identity, either), voted for more spending than any other senator in the 108th Congress. I wonder who voted for the most spending in the 109th, our current Congress? Who voted for the most pork?

McGavicks PoA to fight “Radical Islamic Terrorism” is perhaps the most frightening in that it is a complete affirmation of the Bush Administration’s actions to date. His only convergence on sensibility is his advocacy of implementation of the 9/11 Commissions’s recommendations. He tries to paint Senator Cantwell as weak on security (this from a Republican, go figure) by highlighting her vote against a bill to fence out Mexico. This specious item apprears right next to his snippet about her being the biggest spender in the Senate. Did somebody forget to tell the former CEO that the fence is not being financed by corporate sponsors? Irony can be so ironic. His disingenuousness runs still deeper: Cantwell “rejected a bipartisan bill, voting to give terrorist detainees additional legal rights.” In other words McG tries to ding Cantwell for voting against the unconstitutional suspension of the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments, in defiance of “bipartisan” support, no less. Memo to Mike: twelve (well, eleven plus Lieberman) out of forty-four does not bipartisan make. History will be very kind to those who stood against this legislative travesty and Washington Democrats can be very proud of its entire Congressional delegation in this respect.

McG’s Social Security PoA starts innocuously enough: he vows No privatization of the trust fund. Cautious optimism is immediately betrayed with the next bullet point which calls for “Voluntary personal accounts for young workers”. Huh? This excerpt will be immortalized by future editions of dictionaries everywhere under “contradiction.” He wants to pass legislation protecting the benefits of current and near term retirees–a moot initiative given SS’s solvency thru 2040. Credit where it’s due: a voluntary give back program makes good sense. He is reliably Republican, however, in failing to propose any significant measure to improve its solvency let alone one that would mitigate the regressive nature of this tax on lower income workers.

The ad says nothing about his wholehearted support for pillaging ANWR. No plan to protect jobs. No call for Congressional oversight of a Unitary Executive run amok. No mention of his anti-choice agenda. The choice between McGavick and Cantwell couldn’t be clearer. That this ad appeared on the same page as an article exposing Republican Senator John Warner’s latest flip-flop couldn’t be much more apropos.