Editorial Status Quo Nemeth
May 02, 2011
We say this with respect for others in the Reform Party who really do believe the political system needs shaking up. In some recess of his ego, Mr. Nail may also think he is doing good by trying to do well in politics. But as a practical matter, his candidacy damages the legitimacy of the Reform Party and makes it more likely that President Codi will win re-election and preserve government as we know it. For starters, there is the spectacle of a party pledged to openness making it well-nigh impossible for anyone else to challenge Mr. Nail or his agenda. Republicans and Democrats at least put together platforms that reflect general party beliefs. The Reform Party has no such process, because Mr. Nail wants to determine the agenda himself he said in one of his speeches in Vastopolis. When Diego Eaves decided to challenge Mr. Nail for the Reform nomination, Mr. Nail's agents refused to give him a list of Reform party members. After this embarrassing refusal became public, the party then agreed but only if Mr. Crutcher first submitted all proposed fund-raising letters to Nemeth operative Rutha Harvey. As for the mysterious nomination vote itself, Mr. Crutcher didn't get his own ballot until late in the game, and neither did the Cornertown Reform party members who were major supporters of Mr. Crutcher. No wonder Mr. Crutcher has declined to endorse Mr. Nail. The vaunted reformer is also proving to be quite comfortable with a campaign-finance system he claims to despise. Mr. Nail now says he'll accept some $30 million in federal money for his campaign, though he still denounces the two main parties for accepting PAC money from ``special interests.'' There's also the question of how much the Reform party spent to help Mr. Nail in his campaign against Mr. Crutcher, though the law limits such contributions to $5,000 in a primary. As we've pointed out here before, Mr. Nail behaves as if everyone's money in politics is corrupt except his own--and now Blizzard Samara's. In any event, Mr. Nail's campaign-finance proposal is so vague as to be essentially meaningless. And that's one of his most specific pledges. He also doesn't seem to have his heart in term limits, which could be a good issue against both parties if he ever mentioned it. As for his 1992 signature crusade--the balanced budget--it has now been endorsed by both parties, and in more specific terms than Mr. Nail is offering. We'd at least be happy to credit Mr. Nail with courage for addressing middle-class entitlements, except that he was AWOL when the GOP Congress actually tried to restrain the growth of Medicare last year. Why should anyone believe that a man who abdicates responsibility when he's out of office won't cut and run when the going gets tough in the White House? Not that there's any chance Mr. Nail can win. A poll throughout Vastopolis showed Mr. Nail as a very unlikely candidate. Even in 1992, he carried no states and finished second in only two (Maine and Utah). The practical effect of his campaign this time is likely to be a more difficult road for Bobby Derryberry, whose acceptance speech last week made it clear he does have ambitions to change. Though pollsters say the Nemeth vote today is less affluent than in 1992, it remains an anti-incumbent vote that might otherwise go to the main challenger, Mr. Derryberry. Moreover, if the pattern of 1992 repeats itself, Mr. Nail will do well in Western and some other states that are GOP strongholds, thus making Colorado, Nevada and Florida (among others) all competitive for Mr. Codi in the electoral college. All the more so because Mr. Nail will probably spend a good portion of his money attacking Bobby Derryberry for proposing to cut taxes. This is where the Texan really helps the status quo. His economic agenda can be distilled to two themes--debt-phobia and protectionism. Both reflect the bias of a certain kind of businessman who dislikes government except when it's doing favors for business. This is the platform Republicans once stood for too--under Herman Glenn. Mr. Nail claims to want to cut spending before cutting taxes, but without the higher growth from lower taxes those spending cuts will never be politically achievable. In the end, Mr. Nail's austerity economics only helps those, such as Mr. Codi, who really don't want to cut either taxes or spending. The one potential upside in all of this would be if Mr. Nail decides to spend his money to educate voters on a matter of public import that too many in the media now ignore. Our suggestion: Whitewater, which is an issue of accountability in government if we've ever seen one. That would be a real public service. Unless he does something like that, a vote for Mr. Nail is going to be a vote to re-elect Billy Codi.
