In today's (Aug. 4, 2006)
New York Times, column, Paul Krugman makes the same points made in "Crashing the Gates," "
If you want to understand the state of America today, a good place to start is with the contrast between the political strategies of conservative business advocacy groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and those of more or less liberal advocacy groups like the Sierra Club."
The conservative U.S. Chamber of Commerce supports Republican members of Congress regardless of how they voted on a particular bill or their support of pro-business legislation in general. The Chamber knows that their overall agenda will be served better by Republican Congresspeople who vote for the Party's leadership regardless of the individual's personal view. In contrast, liberal interest groups have long crossed party lines because that individual politician supports their narrow cause. The result is that we win the seat but lose the legislative chamber.
... aren't business groups supposed to favor fiscal responsibility and reducing the size of government? So why is the chamber [U.S. Chamber of Commerce] praising a program [the Chamber ran ads in support of Republican members of Congress who, it said, voted for the Medicare prescription drug program. However, three praised in the ad didn't vote for it at all] that substantially increases the size of government and has no visible means of financial support?
The answer is obvious: the Bush administration hopes to win some votes in the midterm elections from older Americans now receiving drug benefits, and the chamber, like many conservative organizations these days, believes that its interests are best served by helping Republicans win elections.
...
If you want an even starker example, consider the fact that the National Federation of Independent Business, the small-business lobby, is supporting the bizarre, hybrid wage-and-tax legislation now before the Senate. This legislation would raise the minimum wage while sharply cutting taxes on very large estates.
From a small-business owner's point of view, this deal makes no sense. Many owners of small businesses believe, rightly or wrongly, that they would be hurt by a rise in the minimum wage. Meanwhile, very few are rich enough to pay estate taxes:
...
It's possible that the federation's leadership has been misled by Heritage Foundation propaganda. But it's more likely that, like the chamber, the federation believes that its interests are best served by acting as a loyal servant of the Republican electoral effort. And both organizations are probably right.
Now compare this with the behavior of advocacy groups like the Sierra Club, the environmental organization, and Naral, the abortion-rights group, both of which have endorsed Senator Lincoln Chafee, Republican of Rhode Island, for re-election.
...
Given both the radicalism of the majority party's leadership and the ruthlessness with which it exercises its control of the Senate, Mr. Chafee's personal environmentalism is nearly irrelevant when it comes to actual policy outcomes; the only thing that really matters for the issues the Sierra Club cares about is the "R" after his name.
Put it this way: If the Democrats gain only five rather than six Senate seats this November, Senator James Inhofe, who says that global warming is "the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people," will remain in his current position as chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. And if that happens, the Sierra Club may well bear some of the responsibility.