Democratic activists have been experimenting with the term "culture of corruption" to depict the current Republican leadership and win back control of Washington D.C. I believe this to be an important strategy in the months to come, but the results of a survey by
Public Opinion Strategies (R) and Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research (D) suggest that we have work to do.
At the end of this post, I recommend that Democratic candidates need to take very specific, tangible steps in the ethics debate . . . not with words, but with additional, very visible actions.
The most frustrating part of the survey results is that 45% of the respondents indicated their belief that George Bush "would do a better job handling the problems with ethics in our nations capital than the `Democratic Party'" and only 42% said Democrats would do a better job. It is only slightly encouraging that 42% of the respondents indicated that the Democratic Party would be better able to improve the ethics of Washington D.C. than the Republican Party. About 35% voters said the Republican Party would, and a fairly large number said neither (15%).
Although Bush's approval ratings on his handling of ethical issues has decreased to an all-time low for his administration, it is obvious that many of the charges against the Republican leadership for ethical lapses have not stuck to him personally. However, it is probably more important that many have in fact stuck to Republican leaders in Congress.
Also, the majority (63%) of voters do not see the current ethical problems in Washington as worse than "usual," and only 23% see these problems as worse than usual. Of course, the majority of American voters are probably not yet paying much attention to politics and the details of the ethical charges levied at the Republican leadership. When they do pay attention, they likely recall the ethical charges against Democrats eight years ago, and probably don't yet see much difference.
(Note: Although the sample had a small size of about 400, it closely replicates the results of other surveys. See farther down the page in the above link).
Taking action
It is a long time until Election Day and much will certainly happen that can change perceptions. Republicans will go to trial and many will likely be found guilty. However, it is probably most important to improve the public's perception of our handling of ethics in politics.
Any ideas? Clearly, Democrats need to differentiate ourselves from the Republican sleaze machine, but how? The tricky problem is that ethics are one of those qualities that, if you or your supporters explicitly attribute it to you, people often begin to doubt it about you.
My recommendation is becoming more pro-active on the issues of ethics . . . not with words but with actions. Being ethical and being perceived as ethical in politics as more than the absence of charges of unethical behavior. Russ Feingold discovered this long ago. As noted by the folks at RussforPresident, Sen. Feingold has "returned his pay raise" to the US Treasury every year. In addition, for the last twelve years "he has held listening sessions in every county in Wisconsin." Democratic candidates have occasionally taken actions that visibly embody ethical politics, which include not accepting donations over $1,000.
Specifically, I recommend that every Democratic candidate decide what ethical behavior means to them and then take a few concrete, visible, pro-active steps that embody those ideals. This has sometimes been called pre-figurative politics--acting the way that you want the world to be.
In solidarity,
Chair of Eastern Washington Voters
Pullman, WA