Molly Ivins November 3AUSTIN, Texas — I'm really excited about this election. I was trying to imagine making a geekier admission, say, confessing that I have developed a late-life passion for the Boy Scout Pledge or the 4-H motto. No, really, honestly, this is a great election because it's soooo close. I know, every poll you've seen says this one is wipeout, especially here in Texas, so why bother? Listen, the only wipeout is at the top of the ticket: Everything else is up for grabs, including the House, the Senate, all the statewide offices and everything else down to the State Board of Ed, and you will recall that I have warned you of your embarrassment if you don't vote carefully in those Board of Ed races. Try explaining to some friend of yours from out of state why we're teaching our children creationism. And the races everywhere are so close! Just a couple of voters per precinct could cause the biggest upset since Truman beat Dewey. And what's REALLY amazing about that is the R's have a big money advantage. Imagine that. Outspent better than 50 percent, and all these races are still competitive. That's a remarkable testament to people power over money. And all we need is just a LITTLE bit more to prove that money doesn't always win. And that would be a sweet victory. The R's have put $3 million into Texas House of Representative races, a sum so vast compared to any earlier known effort that politicos are just reeling. As I'm sure you understand, people who work in campaigns get quite punchy by the end and are given to speaking with some exaggeration. Metaphors involving football, war and other major forms of combat float around in absurd profusion, so people are toughing it out in the trenches and throwing Hail Mary's and carpet bombing — a veritable festival of martial arts metaphors. Only this time, insiders really are reeling because no one has ever SEEN this much money in legislative races. They earnestly stand around assuring one another that it's "all television now, that's all that matters." But they don't really believe it. Speaking of television: Best Response to an Attack Ad goes to Jim Mattox, of all people, who responded to the old "mad dog" charge with a cool, collected review of the fact that he has made a lot of people mad and he's proud of it. He closes with a reference to buying elections and says, "Now that does make me mad." Great ad. The possibilities for upending the new conventional wisdom — only money counts, television is everything — are endless. Incumbents can always out-raise challengers, but incumbents are in trouble all over the map. The quality of the candidates (such a concept) is actually making a difference. Whether or not they have run good races matters (imagine). Of course, the saddest story leading up to Election Day is that of Sen.
Although there are fewer open-seat races this year and fewer competitive districts, the money continues to pour in. In 34 Senate races, 83 candidates raised $215 million, a 14 percent increase of '96 levels. In House races, 928 candidates raised $361 million, actually a 3 percent decline over '96, according to the Federal Election Commission. Republicans continue to hold a 73 percent fund-raising lead over Democrats. From January through mid-October, the Democrats reported raising $106.9 million and spending $105.5 million. They entered the last days of the campaign with $5.1 million cash on hand and debts totaling $11.1 million. Republican Party national committees raised $184.6 million, spent $177.5 million and had $10.7 million cash on hand and $2 million in debts as of mid-October. The tentative efforts to turn this into an election with a national theme have been fascinating. After waiting 'til the final days, Newt Gingrich approved an ad — for selected Southern districts only — that directly urged voters "not to reward Bill Clinton." Since the peculiar logic of internal Republican Party politics still dictates the man's impeachment, despite public opinion on the subject — it's just a given that a Republican sweep means they impeach Clinton — this was perhaps disingenuous. The D's seized upon it happily and tried to make the endless investigations the issue. Normally, the D's have been sticking to the "education, health care and Social Security" page in the hymn book. The R's in turn repeat their mantra, "Less government, lower taxes, more power here in (Wisconsin, Oregon, whatever)." I always wince when I hear that last argument. For a while, the R's called this nifty notion of turning more power, responsibility and money back to the states "devolution." It was part of the Contract With America, and they talked it up big. Unfortunately, anyone who knows state government, and especially who has watched national issues descend to state government, knows full well what disasters lie in store. Big money, bigger money than folks in Little Rock, Pierre, Tallahassee, Baton Rouge, Albany, etc., have ever seen descends on these state capitals like a reaping machine. For a player like tobacco, used to spending millions in D.C., the state capitals are a candy store, and nothing costs more than 2 cents by their standards. They can buy bills through 50 state capitols cheaper than they ever dreamed of getting one through in Washington. It's pitiful to watch. Of course, you should vote — turnout this low, your vote may never count this much again. Besides, if you don't vote, you can't complain. Molly Ivins is a columnist for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. To find out more about Molly Ivins and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com. COPYRIGHT 1998 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
|
 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
