NationStates Jolt Archive


Essay on 'Whatever it Takes'

Exham
01-09-2004, 05:34
This is (I hope) my final draft essay on the book "Whatever it Takes: The Real Struggle For Political Power in America" by Elizabeth Drew. While I'm sure very few people have read it (If you don't have to, then don't!) I hope the essay is decently accesible. Without further adu:
Elizabeth Drew has concluded that the future of the political power in America rests in Congress, and in Whatever It Takes: The Real Struggle For Political Power In America demonstrates that a in vicious fight for power over Congress and the country, both of the major political parties have stooped to unethical and illegal means to give their candidates the edge in campaigns.

The book opens by describing the importance of Congress and the shift to controlling it in Republican planning. Due to its ability to veto Presidential decisions and propose bills Congress is a powerful asset. The Republican Party’s new strategy involved stopping concentrating on the more publicized Presidential race and expanding their long-term influence via winning Congress. Among the supporters of the Republication cause, the beer industry is one of the largest. According to The National Beer Wholesalers Association (NBWA) represented by vice president for public affairs David Rehr, the beer industry holds influence because of its massive grassroots power. In the words of Rehr “There are over eighteen hundred beer distributors, we’re in virtually every congressional district.” Beer companies have economic gain at stake in politics; they lost power under both the Reagan and Bush administrations and from then onwards have made political alliances in an attempt to stop any more anti-alcohol legislation from being passed. In 1994 the NBWA contributed to seven House candidates and has cooperated with numerous right wing groups. Another group that has been steadily gaining power is the Christian Coalition, headed by Pat Roberson. The Coalition-which insists that it remains a neutral, despite evidence to the contrary-organization is a long time Republican ally, which puts out biased voter guides and freely admits wanting to realign to political landscape to be more in line with its fundamental Christian views. The Nation Rifle Association (NRA) is group that has almost universally supported the Republican cause. The right-wing group has a deeply vested interest in politics, due to their ultimate goal of allowing the unregulated ownership of all types of firearms. With many Republican candidates promising to support repealing the assault weapons ban the NRA gives its full support during the elections. The landscape of American politics is constantly changing due to the many variables introduced by groups and events. In 1995 and 1996 Newt Gingrich was able to secure an Republican victory by forcing President Clinton to adopt a balanced budget, although Clinton was able to turn Gingrich into an unpopular public figure by painting him as extremist. Due to events under Clinton’s presidency politicians were beginning to polarize and the center was steadily shrinking. Politicians becoming were more dependent on financial supporters, and changing their positions to fit with those of their monetary supporters. Clinton was trying to shake his image as a liberal and move to the center, while simultaneously winning back Democratic base voters. Among the Congressional representatives up for re-election was the republican freshman, Randy Tate who his position in 1994 with a mere 51.8% of the vote. Tate is a “pro-family” and pro-gun congressman who supported Newt Gingrich. Another republican up for re-election is Peter Torkildsen, a moderate who differed from the majority of republicans on environmental issues. Against Tate, Torkilden and the other republicans faced an array of democratic groups, most notably organized labor groups. Organized labor fought for democrats-targeting republican candidates and producing distorting ads to further their cause-while trying to retain the guise of neutrality. One republican strategy for gaining funds to fight such groups with was the use of fundraisers, which charged exuberant amounts for entry. The presidential race was not completely ignored, and Bob Dole was the candidate selected to attempt to defeat Bill Clinton. However it became clear early on that Dole was a weak contender who wasted opportunities and alienated several of the republican base groups. The republican party leadership decided to distance themselves from Dole, forfeit the presidency and concentrate on Congress. When republicans in Congress created a separate welfare reform bill that did not conform to what Dole wanted was the closest they ever came to publicly declaring that they had cut him loose. Republican Congressional candidates on the other hand tended to be doing well, in May 1996, Torkildsen, Tate and a third republican Congressional candidate Greg Ganske were confident about their chances, even with negative publicity being thrown at them from democrat camps. The 1996 Republican Nation Convention (RNC), held in San Diego Bob Dole once again too inept to gain to party’s trust back. He was determined to go center while the party moved to the right. Meanwhile the National Republican Congressional Committee created campaign ads-called “issue advocacy” ads for legal purposes-and used a combination of hard and soft money in order to exploit a glaring legal loophole. The RNC itself was a mediocre event, which was all show and sparked no real debate. Several months later the Democratic National Convention (DNC) in Chicago began. Hillary Clinton was on damage control to lighten pressure by left-wing groups that were disagreeing with Bill Clinton’s centralist policies. The DNC was a carefully controlled show, because like republicans the democrats wanted no real controversy to disrupt their plans. After the DNC some democrats were optimistic that Congress could be retaken if they could keep up the campaign’s momentum. The republicans on the other hand were worried because Dole’s blowout at the RNC could hurt the total turnout of republican voters and put their control of Congress in jeopardy. Ralph Reed, of the Christian Coalition focused on bringing Clinton down by attacking his character. It apparently had some affect, as people did consider Dole to be a more moral candidate than Clinton, but Dole was still lagging and his anti-teachers unions stance compounded his problems since education was turning into the big issue for 1996. The Dole campaign was in trouble; since he could not find an effective way to raise his approval ratings and Clinton had made it nearly impossible to attack his policies as leftist by becoming a center candidate. Furthermore, Clinton had forced the republican Congress to make huge concessions, which further demoralized the right. Republicans still hoped to keep Congress out of democratic hands and the fight over House seats became brutal. Washington state become the center of the fight in 1996, with republican groups and public figures aiding the entrenched Tate, who was focusing on winning the blue collar voters of the state. During the fight supporters of both sides contributions with twisting trails of paper where loopholes, and loopholes within loopholes were exploited to the fullest, by the end both candidates in the state had raised millions. On the national level republicans unveiled a massive ad campaign late in the race, which swept through both television and radio, and was intended to swing the last of the undecided voters. During the closing days the democrats took a huge hit when a campaign finance scandal was made public. After that the momentum of the democratic campaign came to a halt and many democratic voters became apathetic and did not vote in the election. Once the election was over both sides were able to just barely reach their major goals. Clinton remained president, despite the late race blow the democrats suffered. The Republicans lost some Congressional seats, but managed to retain enough to keep control of the House.

Elizabeth Drew presents her case articulately. The laws, which supposedly limit campaign donations, are shown as being useless at stopping parties from amassing huge stores of funds to use on candidates. The book also provides valuable insight on what goes on behind the scenes in politics.

Congress holds lots of influence and the book dissects how the different factions use any means within their power to gain that influence. Every individual or group makes compromises to get its way without looking at anything beyond the few issues that it advocates. In the end politics is one of the most contradictory of endeavors; it is the business of running nations, but it is also nothing more than petty disputes between individuals for advantages in a pocket universe long separated from reality.
Opal Isle
01-09-2004, 05:36
I hope that's not your final draft. All you have is one huge ass paragraph. That's like a C paper without even reading it.
Exham
01-09-2004, 05:52
I hope that's not your final draft. All you have is one huge ass paragraph. That's like a C paper without even reading it.
Its what they want, a chapter by chapter approuch, but in one bigass paragraph. I do what I'm told.
Opal Isle
01-09-2004, 05:58
Its what they want, a chapter by chapter approuch, but in one bigass paragraph. I do what I'm told.
Your school sucks. Are you in high school?
Exham
01-09-2004, 06:09
Your school sucks. Are you in high school?High school, junior year.
Opal Isle
01-09-2004, 06:10
High school, junior year.
Anything you learn abou writing papers will probably be useless in college.
Exham
01-09-2004, 06:15
Anything you learn abou writing papers will probably be useless in college.
The only thing I've learned from high school is how to strech a minimum amount of work and guess what other people want to hear. Everything else I learned from the history channel. So, the essay?
Opal Isle
01-09-2004, 06:16
The only thing I've learned from high school is how to strech a minimum amount of work and guess what other people want to hear. Everything else I learned from the history channel. So, the essay?
tl;dr
Exham
01-09-2004, 06:19
tl;dr
Sorry, I don't speak French.
Opal Isle
01-09-2004, 06:20
It's leet. too long; didn't read. it's 12:20. I'm going to sleep soon so I can get up at 7:30.
Xenophobialand
01-09-2004, 06:38
Overall, a pretty clear synopsis, although you could probably shorten it to no more than five sentences by simply stating that Elizabeth Drew wrote book A, in which she states central thesis B (in this case that the Republican party has focused on control of Congress using whatever means at their disposal, because it allows them control of the legislative agenda), and offers as proof example C (the '96 Presidential/Congressional campaigns).

As for her premise, I'm not sure how true it is, primarily because the President gets one big freebie that can throw a hell of a monkeywrench into the legislative process: the ability to appoint members of the judiciary. It's all fine and dandy to be able to write the laws you want right up until the Supreme Court padded with the other team's top legal minds say it's unconstitutional.