Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: THURSDAY, April 5, 1990 TAG: 9004060703
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-15 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: RAY L. GARLAND
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
The DLC is a brainchild of our own celebrated Robb. Its avowed purpose is to push the Democratic Party toward a "mainstream" that would give it back the White House, the one thing most assuredly guaranteed to ruin the party for years to come. One of the DLC's most cherished goals became reality in 1988. That was an all-Southern primary designed to boost the chances of the party's most "conservative" candidate. To make a long story short, it didn't.
Even in Virginia, where Robb plumped hard for one of the most singularly bogus politicians in America today, Sen. Albert Gore Jr. of Tennessee, Jackson topped the field by a comfortable margin.
Though Wilder was among the first to ridicule the pretensions of the DLC, he is now in extremely good odor with proponents of the mainstream theory. Which is exactly what Jackson isn't, though he claimed in New Orleans to represent "New Mainstream." To which the sainted Robb sniffed, "There were some parades I wasn't aware of the Reverend Jackson leading."
While Robb is always threatening to do something spectacular, such as slaying any number of sacred cows, fact is he never does, which is why he remains so popular. In describing the problem with Robb and the DLC a timeless lament comes to mind, "We shall do such things, we know not what, but they shall be the wonder of the Earth."
But what does it really come down to? It comes down to nothing more complex than talking like conservatives when it comes to discussing taxes, debt, national defense and crime, while acting like liberals when it comes to everything else. And this works at the polls because it is exactly expressive of what a majority of the people want.
The genius of the Democratic Party - and the main reason why it holds a majority of the offices in the land - rests on the fact that it understands clearly that the American people want a welfare state without high taxes, and one that reaches out even to those who have money.
Welfarism confined only to the very poor, as first introduced by Franklin Roosevelt, was popular only in the depths of the Great Depression, and even then was subject to much derision.
The American middle class remained deeply suspicious for many years, but when Social Security, Medicare, college-tuition grants, mortgage insurance, etc., incorporated the middle class - and even the rich - the welfare state became as American as apple pie. And we are hot for even larger helpings, as witness the multibillion child-care bill just passed by the U.S. House of Representatives.
But it still goes against the grain for people to admit they are accepting public assistance. It must become a moral right, cloaked in the language of patriotism.
What no one has adequately explained is how the greatness of America can be sustained on a sea of debt. We are aware that something isn't quite right, even in the midst of a virtual full-employment economy. People are working longer hours - women and children have entered the work force in increasing numbers - but family income has barely kept pace with inflation, and many are falling further behind.
While Jackson preaches that the American welfare state hasn't failed, only that it has been insufficiently tried, Wilder preaches the virtue of governmental frugality. But Jacksonism can only triumph in the midst of extreme economic distress. Unlike the generation of the '30s, which remained cautious and circumspect in the face of genuine calamity, the next generation to face that test may grasp at any straw, and be prepared to see the Liberty Bell melted down if it promises a second's gratificaton of desire.
While Jackson apparently intends to run for president in 1992, he ought to await his true moment of national catastrophe. And while Wilder, as a sitting governor of a large state, could offer himself to the national Democratic Party in 1992 without embarrassment, he is unlikely to do so.
As far as the vice presidency is concerned, a Wilder candidacy seems possible only in the event that Jackson comes so close to the brass ring as to require the Democrats to offer a sop to blacks.
If that isn't required, why take the chance? While few Virginians could now be found to admit they didn't vote for Wilder, compare the pre-election polls showing a Wilder landslide with the actual vote. Would any likely Democratic presidential candidate take a chance on that if he didn't have to?
While Bro' Doug may now disdain Bro' Jesse, Wilder's quick elevation in national politics depends on Jackson and how well he does. Wilder and his chief strategist, state Democratic Chairman Pual Goldman, may be angling for a place on the national ticket in 1992, but I doubt it. What seems more likely is a determination to be a player in national politics for years to come. Wilder certainly has the poise and bravado to do that on his own, but so long as Jackson poses a threat to the Democratic establishment, they are more likely to hold up Wilder as the kind of "mainstream" black politician who has a real future in the party.
by CNB