Culture of Corruption

Get used to that phrase, because we're about to hear it for the next 13 months. First it was Congressman Rahm Emanuel (head of the DCCC) on Meet the Press; then it was Nancy Pelosi on Talk of the Nation; now it's Howard Dean on Hardball. It's pretty clear that's what the Democrats are going with to nationalize the 2006 midterm elections in Congress. This certainly works, and with the sheer amount of indictments and investigations on the GOP side it offers a clear choice. But if it's at the expense of substantive issues the American people need to hear about, it could backfire. Here's Dean:

MATTHEWS: If we haven't begun that withdrawal by next November, the election of congressmen and senators across the country, will this be a campaign issue?

DEAN: It will be, but I think the culture of corruption that Tom DeLay and Karl Rove and Scooter Libby and Bill Frist and the Ohio people are bringing to the Republican Party is a much bigger campaign issue.  You can't trust Republicans with your money.  Not only can they not handle, in terms of driving up huge deficits, but it turns out they're also putting it in their own pockets.  Nobody likes corruption.  Not conservatives, not liberals, not Democrats, not Republicans.

Absolutely, but nobody likes Iraq either at this point. Strong majorities say it was a mistake, and clear majorities favor some kind of pullout, whether immediately or in a more gradual fashion. Dean didn't duck questions on Iraq, but he didn't exactly highlight them either.

Emanuel, who had an awful appearance on MTP earlier in the year, was really good last Sunday, blowing up the myth that "Democrats don't have any ideas." He did offer substantive, specific, common sense policies. And he was completely on message with this "culture of corruption" thing. Here's the opening of the relevant part of the transcript:

REP. EMANUEL: The American people have rejected the same policies that are giving us the same results and the status quo.  They want change.  They want big ideas, big reform.  This is going to be a big election, a national election because of the challenges this country faces.  We can do better than the policies that got us into the position we have right now.  And the fact is, the Democrats have an obligation to lay out to the country what those ideas are.

MR. RUSSERT:  So, for example, should we withdraw troops from Iraq?

REP. EMANUEL:  Well, I--let me--let's take what the general just said.  Let's deal with that.

MR. RUSSERT:  But what are the Democratic ideas?

REP. EMANUEL:  I'm going to lay them out.  I here to answer it.  You know, what you guys have provided, Tom, is a set of old policies, even in this crisis we have with Katrina, that got us to this result, which is a failed set of policies, where, in fact, we've added up $3 trillion in the nation's debt, more people are losing health care, and poverty's going up.  Democrats want to offer big ideas to change the direction of this country because we can do better.

See, Emanuel clearly isn't comfortable answering the Iraq question. He's rehearsed the corruption narrative. He's ready to lay big ideas on the table. He doesn't want to get into Iraq. However, unlike many bloggers have charged, he did not completely duck the Iraq question:

REP. EMANUEL: On Iraq, we have a false choice between stay the course and get the same results and just pull up.  I think Senator Levin laid out a very good agenda, which is we're going to have measurements.  You can't say after two and a half years, like you asked the general before, two and a half years, nearly $400 billion, and we have one Iraqi battalion?  We're going to set standards every way and measurements from the political process, economic process and also on the military and national security where Iraq has to stand up.

MR. RUSSERT:  OK.  So--so...

REP. EMANUEL:  Let me go over--let's go...

MR. RUSSERT:  No, no, wait.  So if the Iraqis do not stand up, if there are not 10 battalions, 15 battalions in place, we withdraw?

REP. EMANUEL:  See, Tim, that's the wrong question, in my view.

MR. RUSSERT:  Well...

REP. EMANUEL:  I'll tell you why, because when we...

MR. RUSSERT:  But it's the question I asked.

REP. EMANUEL:  But the Congress has an obligation to hold a standard.  We have given the president a blank check.  It's been a rubber-stamp Congress that sent troops in there without Kevlar vests, without Humvees.  We have to have a standard in which Iraq and the administration measure up over the two years, and at that point we'll evaluate where we are.

And here's the big finish, the big ideas of the Democratic Party. They're actually pretty solid. Russert of course jumps in with some needling (I wonder if he would have asked JFK "Who pays for that" about the space program):

REP. EMANUEL:  Let me address, though, the future of this country.  I'll give you five quick ideas.  One, we make college education as universal for the 21st century that a high school education was in the 20th.

MR. RUSSERT:  And who pays for that?

REP. EMANUEL:  The American people, because it offers--Let me get to it. Second, we get a summit on the budget to deal with the $3 trillion of debt that's been added up in five years and structural deficits of $400 billion a year.  Third, an energy policy that says in 10 years, we cut our dependence on foreign oil in half and make this a hybrid economy.  Four, we create an institute on science and technology that builds for America like, the National Institutes has done for health care, we maintain our edge.  And five, we have a universal health-care system over the next 10 years where if you work, you have health care.  That says fiscal discipline and investing in the American people by reputting people first.  The policies that the Republicans have offered have gotten us in the ditch we have today.

MR. RUSSERT:  In order to pay for those programs, you'd consider raising taxes?

REP. EMANUEL:  I think in this time and age, when we face the challenges we have, everybody has skin in the game.  And I think the tax policies we have in place reward the type of culture of cronyism where, in fact, what we're doing is protecting the most well off while we throw middle-class families in front of the train.

See, Emanuel (who I think offers some excellent proposals here) has figured out how to fold taxes, a question that has pummeled Democrats for years, into the "culture of corruption" narrative that will clearly be the focus for 2006. He has not been able to do so on Iraq. The American people are still starving for leadership on this.

The Democrats need to hear from its constituents about this. He needs to know that it's safe to go in the water. Iraq can be folded into the "culture of corruption" theme. The missing $8B, turning Iraq into a Shiite theocracy cozy with Iran, Plame, Downing Street, soldiers continuing to die for lies and mismanagement... that's on EVERYBODY'S radar screen but the Democrats in Washington. Dean and the Dems simply have to be willing to throw the longball and come up with some coherent messaging on Iraq. It's not QUITE as crucial as it was in 2004 because the policy is not going to change so long as W.'s in the White House. Congressional Dems are not in charge of war policy. But that's no excuse. They have to tell the people what they really think about Iraq, what they'd like to see happen, and what they can do about it from the Congress.

Since there are no positive choices left, I'd argue that ANYTHING you say about Iraq can be construed as the wrong answer. But that's also no reason to ignore it. Unfortunately, for the Democrats that's PRECISELY the reason.