With the election fast approaching we are now entering the season of candidate endorsements by the local papers. In my humble opinion, one of the low points of the year for journalism.
Of all the quarrels and quibbles we have with the Star Tribune and Pioneer Press, there's no more alienating event for the readership (specifically the Conservative segment) than reading the official institutional judgment on who we should be voting for. From on high, these self-selected experts on politics decree the right man for the job.
And at that moment, every dime you ever spent on that paper's subscription or patronizing its advertisers, feels like icy, bitter self-betrayal. Your local paper, as an institution, wraps it's arms and legs around a candidate you may despise and tells you and the world to vote for him. It doesn't get any more lonely than that for the dissenting news consumer.
When the complaints roll in from the Right about bias in endorsements, inevitably someone produces anecdotal evidence on the balance present in these selections. Defenses of how the editorial board picks the right person for the job, regardless of party affiliation. Any perceived bias is, as always, dismissed as a figment of the right wing imagination.
But this year, it looks like we have a little science on our side. Peter Swanson from Swanblog got his hands on a data set chronicling the nature of the Star Tribune's endorsements from 1988 - 2000. His conclusion is, you right wingers from Minneapolis have reason to feel alienated by your hometown paper. Excerpt:
In addition to endorsing Democrats more frequently than Republicans, the Strib rarely endorses a Republican in a close race. Looking at U.S. House endorsements, almost all of the Republican endorsements are in safe Republican or safe Democrat districts. When considering endorsement in, say, the Third District, the Republican candidate is going to win anyway, so it is safe to endorse him. In districts safe for Democrats, an endorsement of a Republican here or there gives the appearance of being even-handed without risking an effect on the outcome.
In short, the Star Tribune attempts to create the illusion of balance, while pursuing their normal ideological goals. As a result, their process of endorsement is more of a game than their honest assessment of what would create an optimal government. If it was the latter, you'd see straight party line endorsements. But that would bring down their aggressively defended facade as fair, objective arbiters of political issues and candidates. So instead you get strategic calculations and artful dodging. Call it what you will, but don't call it news. Or a service to the readers.
This week the Pioneer Press began its three week long marathon of providing daily endorsements, for over 50 races, across both Minnesota and Wisconsin. Everything from President down to local school board races receives their final judgment.
Reviewing what they have so far, I must say the right wing slide we've seen signs of recently at the PiPress seems to be continuing. Lots of GOP endorsements, for at least these suburban races, a traditional stronghold for Republicans. (It would be interesting to see an analysis of endorsements by incumbent status - which may be driving these decisions more than party affiliation).
Even with the refreshing ideological diversity, some troubling themes emerge in their decision making criteria. Specifically, they seem to have a litmus test on a willingness by the candidates to raise taxes. Examples from this weeks' chosen few endorsees.
Republican Lloyd Cybart in 37A (Apple Valley/Burnsville):
Wisely, he did not sign the Taxpayer League's "no-taxes" pledge, indicating to us that he is willing to consider all options in addressing the state?s budget problems. But we also believe that he would stand firm against tax increases except as a last resort.
So it's a sign of "wisdom" to raise taxes. I guess it's encouraging to hear he'd only consider raising taxes only as a "last resort".
Republican Dennis Ozment in 37B (Rosemount)
Ozment, who also declined to sign the "no-taxes" pledge, is a fiscal conservative who would only back a tax increase as a last resort. He would support an increase in the gas tax if necessary to fund transportation improvements, but wants the distribution formula made fairer for metro-area counties.
Another 'last resort' guy. So only after social spending has been zeroed out and grandma has been thrown in the street and infants are left starving in their cribs, then we can consider raising taxes? Now THAT's fiscal conservatism. But for some reason I suspect the Pioneer Press's "last resort" looks a lot like the "first option" when its favored spending initiatives conflict with revenue projections.
Republican Mary Liz Holberg in 36A (Lakeville):
In the race to represent this fast-growing Lakeville district, incumbent Republican Mary Liz Holberg stands out for her experience, her intimate knowledge of the issues and her willingness to look at the range of options for dealing with the state's ongoing budget challenges.
As long as that range of options includes raising taxes, she's cool with the Pioneer Press. Not to mention wise.
Democrat Joe Atkins from 39B (Inver Grove Heights)
First, he would ensure that state government ran as lean as it could. Then, Atkins said he wouldn't just look at tax increases or spending cuts to plug any budget gaps in the next biennium he would also push the state to look for funding alternatives, including public-private partnerships.
No, he wouldn't "just" look at tax increases, he'd look at all sorts of things. Right after he raised some taxes.
Democrat Will Morgan from 39A (western Dakota County):
Morgan said he would also be open to rolling back state income tax cuts on the wealthiest Minnesotans and would also take a hard look at corporate taxes. We would urge caution here - Minnesota's tax burden is already among the nation's highest. Morgan said that tax increases should be considered only as a last resort. We'd agree.
Again with the last resort? Third mention of it. What exactly does that mean to these people? Didn't that particular question ever come up during the interviews conducted by these journalism professionals?
Never fear, some enlightenment bleeds out between the lines in this blurb about Duke Powell, the guy they didn't endorse in 40A:
While we salute his thriftiness, we fear that strict adherence to the no-taxes pledge could back the Legislature into a corner when it comes to investing in important projects, such as the Central Corridor and a new Twins stadium for St. Paul.
There it is - defined! Subsidizing professional sports with hundreds of millions of dollars of the public's money - that's the last resort. Maybe by "resort" they meant this other Merriam Webster definition of the word: "a place providing recreation, especially to vacationers."
But, trust them, it's the last one. Except for the new Gopher football stadium. And then the new Vikings stadium. And then, that's it! At least until the Timberwolves start getting squirrelly again about their revenue streams.
What's odd about this logic is that I doubt any single individual on the editorial board actually holds that position, tax increases, but only for stadiums. I'm sure the liberal majority is frothing at the mouth to raise taxes, but the last thing on their priority list is a new Twins Stadium. And the conservative(s) would probably agree with the strict adherence to the "no new taxes" pledge. But if some sleazy back room political deal with an obstinate DFL to raise taxes is deemed necessary to get a budget passed next term, the last thing a fiscal conservative could justify is spending an obscene amount of money to subsidize a private business, even if it is in St. Paul.
So this endorsement, this expression of the institutional voice, takes the form of an opinion that no one actually holds. Some median point of abstraction, written to satisfy no one, except for perhaps a corporate mission encouraging blind boosterism of St. Paul.
I suppose promoting this abstraction is less alienating than cold political calculation. But it still ain't news or a service to the reader.
No comments:
Post a Comment