For its practitioners, punditry--and its lesser sibling, surrogacy--is often a transient affair. While a core commentariat enjoys longevity, many more--mere apprentices in the dark arts of instant analysis and spin-hypnosis--flash briefly across the screen, and then, quickly depixilate. The market demands this cruel process, and market selections are often fickle.
The Republican Party seems aware of this, and has recently been grunting about their need to "rebrand" themselves. So, we are seeing a new batch of hopefuls audition for a place in the surrogate thugocracy. They're younger (relatively), better looking, and--seemingly--less threatening. After all, who would you prefer to carry your message over a medium that requires telegenic pizazz, Ted Stevens or Dana Perino? Last weekend it was Carly Fiorina's, turn, and this week, Nancy Pfotenhauer has been rolled out.
So, just who is Nancy Pfotenhauer?
Those eager to audition as high-profile Republican surrogates could profit from studying the resume of Nancy Pfotenhauer. Indeed, Pfotenhauer's career is a blueprint for advancement through the interconnected world of private equity, right-wing think tanks, and the Republican power elite.
Pfotenhauer began her transit through the sometimes shadowy world of these interlocking nodes of conservative power as a student at George Mason University, studying under Walter Williams. (Williams, by the way, is a favorite substitute host for Rush Limbaugh.) Williams acts as a kind of filter for conservative institutions, seeking out promising acolytes from among his students. At 24, Pftoenhauer leveraged her association with Williams and was appointed part of the transition team for then incoming President George H.W. Bush where she advised on appointments to both the Federal Trade Commission and the Interstate Commerce Commission. Almost immediately, Pfotenhauer became a player in the world of policy-drafting, and moved easily in and out of government, lobbying, and conservative think tanks. Eventually she emerged as the "Washington Director"--read lobbyist--for Koch Industries. In 2001, she moved over to the conservative think tank Independent Women's Forum, and currently directs the conservative think tank Americans for Prosperity Foundation. (These two foundations/think tanks share office space and staff.)
Both Americans for Prosperity and the Independent Women's Forum are funded in large part by foundations controlled by the Koch family, and Koch Industries. Indeed, Koch is a patron saint of the netherworld of conservative intellectuals generally, and Nancy Pfotenhauer specifically. The guiding vision of Koch can be found in the persons of Charles and David Koch, owners of the privately-held conglomerate. (Depending on the metric used, Koch is the 1st or 2nd largest privately-held conglomerate in the United States.)
Originally founded in Texas by Charles and David's father, Fred Koch--a charter member of the John Birch Society--as an oil delivery company, Koch grew into a oil and natural gas delivery, trading and refining business. Eventually, Koch diversified into other extractive and extraction-related industries. Koch owns both Georgia-Pacific, a huge lumber and paper concern, and the chemical-fiber giant, Invista (a company that brought you--among other products--Teflon).
How does Koch see itself? Here's a description--rendered in appropriate business-babble--from the company:
Koch Industries is perhaps best viewed as a collection of capabilities continually searching for new ways to create value in society..
Never mind the personification of "capabilities continually searching", what are the core principles Koch embraces while it continually searches to make our lives richer, fuller, better, and more value-added? Again, this is from Koch Industries boilerplate:
"Integrity, humility, intellectual honesty, and respect for others..."
In fact, Koch Industries is a nasty bit of business. Environmentally, they are one of the dirtiest corporations in America. In the 1990's alone, they were responsible for over 300 oil pipeline leaks in five states. In Minnesota they were fined 8 million dollars for discharging oil into streams. Separately, they were indicted by the federal government--97 counts--for lying about a large spill--91 metric tons--of benzene in Texas. As the Clinton years waned, Koch faced civil fines in excess of 300 million dollars and 4 Koch employees faced criminal charges. In all, Koch was--and is--a classic demonstration of the profligate and wasty ways of the market.
While some of the 97 counts were consolidated by Clinton's Justice Department, after the election of George W. Bush, John Ashcroft's Justice Department agreed to drop the affair after Koch agreed to plead to a lesser charge of falsifying documents and paid a small fine. Pfotenhauer was, at the time, chief lobbyist for Koch Industries.
In 2002, Pfotenhauer--in a demonstration of the common practice among the power elite of interconnectedness--was appointed by John Ashcroft to the National Advisory Committee on Violence Against Women. This appointment was in keeping with the perverse cynicism of the Bush Administration. Previously, Pfotenhauer made clear her position when she spoke out againt the 1994 Violence Against Women Act. This act, Pfotenhauer declaimed at the time, "will do nothing to protect women from crime. It will, though, perpetuate false information, waste money and urge vulnerable women to mistrust all men". (oh yea, I added the italics.)
The Kochs have used their millions to set up a series of interlocking foundations,which in turn fund a large array of conservative groups that share the mission of advocating free-market principles. There are many of these Koch financed think tanks--perhaps the most celebrated being the Cato Institute--including the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, headed today by Nancy Pfotenhauer. What is the AFPF's mission? Here's how the "non-profit" describes itself:
"[AFPF is] a nationwide organization of citizen leaders committed to advancing every individual's right to economic freedom and opportunity. AFPF believes reducing the size and scope of government is the best safeguard to ensuring individual productivity and prosperity for all Americans. AFPF educates and engages citizens in support of restraining state and federal government growth, and returning government to its constitutional limits."
What does this bit of public-relations fluff really mean? Simply put, We are in the business of market-based advocacy. So, why do we care about Nancy Pfotenhauer? What is the significance for the rest of us? So what if she speaks for John McCain? If I may be indulged a bit of self-plagarizing, this is from an earlier diary:
So, what can we expect from this crew? Simply put, more "market-based" solutions--read deregulation and privatization. We certainly see this in McCain's health care plan. Privatization means a renewed push for school vouchers, more private contractors--from KBR to Blackwater to privatizing the prison system, to outsourcing myriad other public functions from issuing passports to running elections (Diebold). Privatization means dissolving shared public responsibility; it means an agenda that surrenders the polity to the discipline of the market.
What kind of simple frames, then, can we expect from McCain and his advisors?
-
Tax cuts (and McCain's health care proposal): "It's the people's money and they know how to spend it better than bureaucrats do." Or, "Let's get government off the people's backs so they can thrive, innovate, and prosper.
- Privatization: "The market works efficiently, 'bloated' big government is wasteful." (A tip of the conical hat to Ronald Reagan here).
-
Deregulation: "American businesses cannot compete in the global market when they are hamstrung by needless domestic regulation (ex: Sarbanes-Oxley) drafted by (again) bureaucrats who've never had to meet a payroll, pay a supplier, blah, blah, blah.".
The economic message from John McCain is clear. "My friends," you're on your own...good luck