By John Fund
Thursday, October 14, 2021
Nothing reveals the double standard by which Beltway
Washington deals with mavericks than the different treatment accorded two
independent-minded senators in recent years.
The late John McCain of Arizona was celebrated for going
against his party, never more so than when, in 2017, his one vote killed a GOP
repeal of parts of Obamacare. But now, for standing up to the $3.5 trillion
Biden budget extravaganza, Arizona’s Kyrsten Sinema is fast becoming a pariah
in her party, as McCain was in his.
Media scorn has been brutal. Maureen Dowd of the New
York Times attacked her. Saturday Night Live portrayed
her as obstructionist and came as close as one is still allowed in these PC
times to saying that she was a dumb blonde. Liberal blogger Matthew Yglesias
denounced her as a tool of corporate lobbyists and asked, “Is Kyrsten Sinema on
the take?”
Her former colleagues in the House have singled her out.
“This is not progressives versus moderates,” said
Representative Ro Khanna (D., Calif.), a progressive and the assistant whip of
the House Democratic caucus. “This is the entire Democratic Party and Joe Biden
versus Kyrsten Sinema.”
Back home in Arizona, the state Democratic Party just
passed a resolution criticizing her and hinted at a possible primary challenge
in 2024. Angry, hectoring left-wing activists pursued her into a public
restroom and proudly posted a video of their stunt.
Key Washington Democrats have effectively disowned her.
When Democratic leaders issued a joint statement condemning the bathroom
harassment, Senator Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) withheld his endorsement because
the statement didn’t include a rebuke of Sinema’s policy views.
President Biden was little better. Wall Street
Journal columnist Peggy Noonan pointed out his passive-aggressive
response: “I don’t think they’re appropriate tactics, but it happens to
everybody. . . . It’s part of the process.” Noonan noted that “to announce it
is part of the process is to make it part of the process. It
was as if he were saying: Yeah, she’s got me mad. Hound her some more.”
The left-wing anger against Sinema may in part be
explained by her having once been such a strong progressive. A bisexual
triathlete who was raised in poverty and became a social worker, Sinema in 2013
became the first member of Congress to list “None” as her religion. In the
early 2000s, she was the spokeswoman for the Green Party and dressed up in a
black veil and a pink tutu to protest the war in Iraq. As a Democrat, she was
elected to the state house in 2004 and retained her bomb-throwing zeal.
When I met her at an immigration conference in Phoenix in
2006, she introduced herself by extending her hand and saying, “Hi. I’m
Kyrsten. I’m in the Arizona house and I’m a socialist.” The lefty Phoenix
New Times named her “Best Local Lefty Icon” as late as 2011, praising
her as “a valiant champion for the poor, the underprivileged, and the state’s
immigrant population.”
But glimmers of a changed attitude and a suspicion of the
limits of impersonal government programs could be seen early on. In her 2009 book Unite
and Conquer: How to Build Coalitions That Win and Last, she wrote
dismissively of “the dread disease” of “identity politics” and how liberals too
quickly embraced the “mantle of victimhood.” When she ran for Congress in 2012,
she said her social-work ethos prompted her to pledge to govern “the same way I
try to live my life — which is to seek understanding of those around me rather
than to move forward with a combative attitude.”
Once in Congress, Sinema did follow that new course. She
sought out Republicans to co-sponsor her bills, she tempered her rhetoric, she
became a member of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, and she voted three
times against electing Nancy Pelosi as speaker. When she ran for the Senate in
2018, one of her ads deplored how people in Washington “are more interested in
their talking points and their ideology than getting stuff done.”
In her first year in the Senate, the nonpartisan GovTrack
survey found her to be the most conservative Democrat. One notch less
conservative than she was eclectic libertarian senator Rand Paul (R., Ky.).
In May, the Arizona Republic asked her
what her long-term goals in the Senate were. She replied:
Most folks in Arizona aren’t
thinking to themselves, “What is the government doing for me today?” They’re
often thinking about what the government is doing to me today,
right? . . . I want Arizonans to, one, not have to think about their government
very much. But, two, when they do, to think to themselves: “Well, that it is at
least a little less bad than it used to be, it’s less painful than it used to
be and Kyrsten has done some work to help make my life a little bit easier and
a little bit better.”
It’s no wonder that such a minimalist governing agenda
prompted a senior Senate Democratic aide to describe her as “an enigma shrouded
in mystery.”
But perhaps she isn’t. She has long held out McCain as a
political role model, and in her first speech as a senator she called him “a
personal hero.”
“I think she definitely would like for her legacy to be ‘the
maverick’ like him,” Grant Woods, a former state attorney general of Arizona
and a former chief of staff to McCain, told Time magazine. “He
was instinctively drawn to doing the opposite of what he was told and what
people expected. She’s definitely attracted to that image.”
On substance, she has emulated McCain in putting herself
in the room where deals are cut, as she did when she helped broker the COVID-19
relief package in March and, in August, the $1.2 trillion bipartisan
infrastructure package that won 19 Republican votes in the Senate.
But the media clearly reject any comparisons to their
hero McCain. “Sinema is missing perhaps the most important facet of McCain’s
persona — the glue that, more than any stubbornness or mavericky vote, . . .
was responsible for his exalted status,” explained Mother Jones reporter
Tim Murphy. “He absolutely craved the spotlight. He practically had an endowed
chair on Meet the Press. He appeared in Wedding Crashers.
When McCain died, several thousand reporters all filed stories at once about
his famous press scrums in the Capitol or on the campaign trail.” In other
words, McCain treated the media as the important players they like to see
themselves being. Left unsaid was the fact that McCain was the most prodigious
leaker of Senate insider stories that body had ever seen. The media reward
loose lips.
Sinema doesn’t leak, distrusts the media, and avoids
giving interviews in nonnational outlets. In 2018, National Journal’s
Josh Kraushaar laughed that “trying to report on Sinema’s Senate campaign was
like having to deal with an incompetent cable company. Calls and e-mails to her
campaign went unreturned for days.”
The liberal sources the media rely on have long made
clear their view of her as a non–team player. In 2016, she was nowhere to be
seen at a massive Hillary Clinton pre-election rally at Arizona State
University, which is in her home district and where Sinema teaches. A
Democratic operative spotted her at a local coffee shop instead, holding a
campaign event for herself at the same time.
To pressure Sinema to pledge her vote for Biden’s $3.5
trillion bill, progressives have tried everything, from accosting her on
airplanes to putting her face on a milk carton at local football games. They
are actively recruiting Representative Ruben Gallego, who took Sinema’s House
seat, to primary her in 2024.
But defeating her won’t be easy. She has $3.6 million in
her campaign account, and an OH Predictive Insights poll found her overall
favorability rating roughly equal to that of fellow Arizona Democratic senator
Mark Kelly. Sinema is less popular among Democrats but has a 40 percent
favorability rating among Republicans.
In addition, it’s entirely possible that Sinema could win
her primary even if most Democrats vote against her. Arizona law allows unaffiliated
voters — one in three of all those registered — to vote in any primary. In both
2010 and 2016, John McCain lost the votes of registered Republicans in his
party primary but prevailed by cleaning up with independents.
Some Sinema sympathizers also believe she can build back
some goodwill within the party if both the bipartisan infrastructure bill and a
pared-back version of Biden’s social-welfare extravaganza eventually become
law.
But don’t bet on it. The Hill reported
that other issues will continue to stick in the craw of progressive groups,
chief among them her stubborn support of the Senate filibuster.
So if progressives continue to find reasons to lust for a
primary challenge, they should realize they are putting her Senate seat at
risk. Many Democrats aren’t convinced that a liberal such as Gallego could win
the general elecyion after a bloody internecine primary. “There’s a near zero
chance he would win statewide,” a Democratic operative told The Hill.
“That’s something Democrats will really have to ask themselves in seeking to
defeat Sinema, is do they want someone to primary her who will almost certainly
hand the seat to Republicans?”
No comments:
Post a Comment