CNU Poll, Liz Cheney, and Censorship
The trappings of office in an era of mistrust
Last week I spoke with a well known political consultant who told me about a conversation he had with one of his clients regarding a very recent and very controversial vote held in the U.S. House of Representatives.
The vote? Impeachment of the President of the United States.
The client - a member of Congress - is not from Virginia.
This member of Congress stated how he intended to vote.
The person he pays for political advice asked why.
The congressmen said it was a matter of conscience.
The consultant replied, “You’re not in Congress to vote your conscience, you’re in Congress to represent your district. And your district is X - so that’s how you vote. If you want to vote your conscience that’s the time to start thinking about getting out of Congress.”
Good, bad, or indifferent, this is politics at 21% of the 21st Century in America. It is what it is.
Today at 4pm the House Republican Conference is meeting to discuss the leadership status of Representative Liz Cheney who very publicly stated that as a matter of conscience she was voting to impeach President Trump.
Whether or not you agree with Cheney on her vote, she represents not only the entire state of Wyoming, but also chairs the House Republican Conference. While the vote was not whipped, Cheney chose to be very vocal about it and without discussing it privately with members of the Conference who also voted for her. As such, many of the people who had voted for her were caught flat footed. Many of them (like 95% of them) also disagreed with her vote.
In speaking with a member of Congress this morning, we agreed with the adage that oftentimes in life and politics, “It’s not what you do, but the manner in which you do it.”
Today’s discussion will be less likely about her vote and more likely about her leadership.
Which segues into the recent Christopher Newport University Wason Center Survey released this week. Click here to see that survey.
In that survey, we find some VERY interesting data points which reveal where Virginians’ spending priorities are and also where Virginians stand on top line issues currently being debated in the General Assembly.
What it doesn’t show is why political consultants get paid what they get paid.
Basically, they get paid to stop incumbents and candidates from making mistakes in representing districts OR to take advantage of those who do make those mistakes.
One of the most dangerous trappings of office is listening to people who don’t vote for you more often than people who actually do. While many votes are rarely seen by the public, all it takes is one vote or one issue to upend it all.
*Raises hand*
“Like the Virginia Beach mayor’s race?”
“Exactly. But that was not about a vote. That was about an issue about an event or series of events. Thanks for subscribing!”
Reminder:
All of these decision points create narratives and political brands.
So, naturally when the CNU survey came out I wanted to see what they saw. CNU’s Wason Center is an academic polling operation and they are good at it. What they are not (and readily admit) is a campaign polling and data analytics operation. They don’t apply the data to decisions made by voters in districts at election time.
CNU asked Virginians what their budget priorities are - 69% said health care, 60% said K-12, 60% said Economic Development, 60% said Social Service, and 60% said Public Safety.
#COVID.
Treating the sick, educating kids, creating jobs, helping those in need, and keeping people safe.
Basic but VERY important stuff, right? Yes. And in an emotion charged pandemic? Politically very dangerous.
Then it drops to 50% for Environment and 50% for Labor and Workers Compensation.
THEN CNU asked top line questions about public employee collective bargaining, legalizing marijuana, repealing the death penalty, eliminating mandatory minimums, requiring paid sick leave, and about paying tax rebates for the purchase of electric vehicles.
Most are important issues and some are controversial. The questions alone don’t indicate any problems for legislators but they can mislead when compared to spending priorities.
Issues always turn or hinge on The Cost. That’s why restaurant menus print the prices. It helps inform and speed decision making.
This is where Campaign Polling and Data Analytics do their work. They ask questions like “Would you be more or less likely to vote for Delegate X if you knew they voted to cut Medicaid (health care) and/or K-12 funding by X amount of your tax dollars in order to give that money to X instead?”
And the cut is also a factor of 10x - over 10 years. An annual appropriations of say $40 million becomes $400 million over 10 years at election time. Even though Virginia’s budget is for two years, the federalization of our elections makes it 10 because that’s how Congress budgets.
It is what is is, folks.
It doesn’t take those firms long to find women aged 35-45 with kids in suburban school districts who are pissed off about something that takes their tax money away from their kids.
We live in a populist era in which people like Matt Taibbi write gleefully about how good it was to stick it to Wall Street in this Game Stop/Reddit episode. His recent column Suck It, Wall Street is a MUST READ not just to better understand what happened but also the cultural reaction to it. Remember, as Andrew Breitbart rightly noted:
Politics is downstream from culture.
The Game Stop portion of this program shows that very few actually understand what happened, but they absolutely LOVE LOVE LOVE that it happened. They instinctively love thinking that the rich got screwed. Americans love an underdog and most of us think we are one.
Which brings us to - what information can we trust these days? OR what is supposed to even inform a conscience?
Example in today’s WSJ, a U.S. Senator taking You Tube to task for removing two videos of testimony from a December Senate committee meeting. The senator alleges that the testimony was removed because it offered information that conflicted with the NIH on COVID treatments.
The censors at YouTube have decided for all of us that the American public shouldn’t be able to hear what senators heard. Apparently they are smarter than medical doctors who have devoted their lives to science and use their skills to save lives. They have decided there is only one medical viewpoint allowed, and it is the viewpoint dictated by government agencies. Government-sanctioned censorship of ideas and speech should frighten us all.
SEE! BIG TECH is censoring me! OR potentially worse - what’s the point of keeping your doctor if your doctor cannot make an informed decision?
Political philosophy usually cleaves along the line of Who Decides? Us or them. State or federal. Your god or your government. Where does ultimate authority reside?
The problem these days is more dangerous when we don’t know if the information we base our decisions on is even true or not. We are left to agree with data that confirms our biases rather than data that challenges it.
I’ll end on a bit of good news today.
The Virginia House of Delegates defeated HB2003 with a bipartisan vote of 44-54. Informed consciences won out over a bill that would make: (italicized words are the bill text)
A. The following fraudulent acts or practices committed by a supplier in connection with a consumer transaction are hereby declared unlawful:
66. Using in any advertising any information regarding the quality of any public or private elementary or secondary school other than information derived from the school quality indicators contained in the School Quality Profiles established by the Department of Education or information derived from the school's website or the website of the school's district, unless such advertising contains a statement, displayed on its face in a conspicuous manner, that such school quality information is not derived from the school quality indicators contained in the School Quality Profiles established by the Department of Education or endorsed by the Department of Education. The provisions of subsection F of § 59.1-199 shall apply to this subdivision.
I texted one of the Delegates about HB2003 before the floor vote. He voted No.
“So it’s illegal to have free speech about schools unless we use their data??”
He replied:
“BINGO.”
Like Charlie Buckets asks Grandpa Joe in Willy Wonka:
Why doesn’t she (Violet Beauregard) listen to Mr. Wonka?
Because Charlie, she’s a nit wit.
Wonka dryly:
Stop. Don’t. Come back.