The GOP's Race Problem
Why the party can't afford Trent Lott.
BY THOMAS J. BRAY
Tuesday, December 17, 2002 12:01 a.m. EST
URL:http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/tbray/?id=110002781
On "Meet the Press" Sunday, Sen. Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat, made clear to Republicans the price they will pay if they allow Trent Lott to get away with "apologizing" for his egregious remarks without squarely facing up to his responsibility for them.
The Lott episode, Mr. Levin asserted, only confirms what Democrats have long known about Republicans: that they use Willie Horton-style "code" to exploit racial fears and win elections. "It even happened again in Michigan's race for governor this fall," the senator stated.
He was referring to Republican candidate Dick Posthumus's attacks on his opponent's comments supporting racial reparations and a memo from Detroit's Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick outlining the spoils he would expect--including a quota of 20% of gubernatorial appointments--in return for supporting Democrat Jennifer Granholm, who ultimately won. Supporters of Mr. Posthumus ran a particularly ham-handed ad quoting the memo against the background of a glowering photo of Mayor Kilpatrick.
Mr. Levin's assertions about Mr. Posthumus's motives are highly dubious. Nobody believes there is a racist bone in Mr. Posthumus's body, and the weak black turnout in Detroit suggests African-Americans there weren't particularly exercised. And it was the Democrat, Ms. Granholm, who sought to exploit the race issue explicitly by pandering to an NAACP audience on the reparations issue, though she claimed ridiculously that she had meant something other than cash payments. Nor did Mayor Kilpatrick deny the existence of his outrageous memo, though Ms. Granholm denied ever having seen it.
But the point is not to argue Mr. Posthumus's intentions. If Republicans ever hope to see the day when they don't get attacked for racism every time they raise such issues, they need to begin laying down the law against politicians like Mr. Lott who give even the appearance of pining for segregation.
There is precedent for this. In the late 1940s and early 1950s, liberals like historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. formed the Americans for Democratic Action as a vehicle for espousing their views while explicitly denouncing American leftists who seemed too comfortable with Stalinism. They would plead guilty to wanting bigger, more activist government, but innocent to McCarthyite charges that their principles were simply "code" for supporting communism.
Republicans need to think in similar terms. No, dumping Mr. Lott won't inhibit liberal ideologues like Mr. Levin, much less professional racialists like Jesse Jackson of "Hymietown" fame. Unable to cope with the thought that Republicans keep winning elections on the merits, they must invent conspiracy theories about a "new racism" for their downward political spiral.
But to gain true majority status, Republicans must feel comfortable within their own skins. Nobody seriously believes Trent Lott wants to roll back history to 1948. And no doubt he does "regret" his words now. But the fact is that he said them--and it's obvious to everybody that they weren't just "poorly chosen." They reflected sentiments he had expressed before. He may not be racist, but somewhere down inside Trent Lott there is surely a politically fatal blindness to the salience of race in American life. Republicans can't afford to have such a man acting as their leader.
So when Republicans return to Washington after the holidays, their first order of business will be to meet on Jan. 6 and consider naming a new leader. President Bush has said he doesn't think that Mr. Lott should resign, but if the caucus can't muster enough votes to pick a new leader, every Republican action will be subject to second-guessing--beginning with the nomination and confirmation of federal judges, including the likely appointment of at least two new Supreme Court justices.
A watching public might accept that the nominees have a "hard line" position on abortion. But if Democrats can claim the nominees ever spoke "code words" for racism, they are doomed. And Mr. Lott makes it easier for Democrats to assert that almost any principled conservative position on the issues--crime, affirmative action, reparations, school choice--is "code."
Might Trent Lott pull down the temple by walking away from the Senate altogether, thus threatening the GOP's narrow majority in the Senate? Perhaps, but if he does, good riddance. He would only be emphasizing what a silly, feckless leader he has been--and underlining the degree to which Republicans are willing to draw some important lines in the sand.
To really run the Senate, after all, Republicans need 60 votes. And if they want to get to that promised land, or somewhere close to it, they will need to persuade voters they have the whole country's best interests at heart. Here indeed is a chance for the GOP--and particularly for principled conservatives--to show that they look to an expansive future, not to a narrow, segregationist past.
Mr. Bray is a staff columnist at the Detroit News. His OpinionJournal.com column appears Tuesdays. |
