They Don’t Want No Civil War: The Belmont Civility Forum

By Kleinheider Posted on October 6, 2008 at 5:35 pm

Phil Bredesen’s civility forum this afternoon sponsored by the Tennessee Business Roundtable and the Freedom Forum featuring both political and media bigwigs turned out some extremely enlightening discussion over the state of political discourse in the nation.

The headliners of the event, Phil Bredesen and Senator Howard Baker, were not part of the geberal panel discussion but did set the tone with short speeches

Howard Baker explained that while excitement for cause and party are part of the process those stimuli should not result in us losing our way to the extent we have.

“Not withstanding the enthusiasm of debate, people must come with an open mind about what people have to say,” Baker said.

Phil Bredesen said that as we hit the “home stretch of one of the hardest fought campaigns” in memory, it is in our interest to “hit the pause button” and reflect.

Bredesen credited his wife Andrea Conte, for spearheading this effort.

Both Bredesen and Baker called for a new respect for governing rather than the uber-concentration on raw politics.

“Politics is a contact sport. Anything we can do to put respect back in the process is essential,” Bredesen explained.

After the speeches by Bredesen and Baker, panelists former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, former Colorado Congresswoman Pat Schroeder, NBC News VP Mark Whitaker, Bill Nichols of the Politico and moderator Bernard Shaw were introduced.

After taking their seats the assembled audience was treated to an mini history of political advertising.

Starting with the 1964 campaign’s Daisy Ad, the videos showed ads from Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford crescendoing into 1988’s Willie Horton ad as well as the “swift boat” ads of 2004. Advertising from both John McCain and Barack Obama were also featured.

Haley Barbour started out the discussion outlining his barometer for appropriate negativism campaigns. Barbour asks only two questions, “Is it true and is it relevant?”

Barbour went on to argue that this decline in civil discourse is not a result of any change in politics but a change in media.

“What’s happening is not new,” explains Barbour. “There is just more media to broadcast it.”

While Patricia Schroeder did not disagree, she put the coarsening of our political culture chiefly on the way Congressional districts have been drawn. Reapportionment, she asserted, led to districts which are reliably either Republican or Democratic. These safe districts, Schroeder argues, encourage extremism.

“These people are scared of getting primaries, not losing general elections,” explained Schroeder.

Mark Whitaker chimed in with an interesting assertion. He argued that it was not just the candidates and the campaigns will to win that led them to go negative.

He said that political donors hold sway over politicians not only when they govern but when they campaign as well. Candidates get pressure from big partisan donors to attack — and they often get what they pay for.

Haley Barbour offered the observation that in the era of 24 hour media and McCain/Feingold campaigns don’t control their messages anymore. They could not stop the negativism even if they wanted to. Third party groups and the attacks they produce often shape the political discourse in ways that campaigns cannot control.

Bill Nichols concurred pointing to the advent and prominence of underground viral email campaigns such as the emails detailing wildly inaccurate connections of Barack Obama to the religion of Islam.

When Bernard Shaw asked what had happened to fundamental respect, the discussion again turned to reapportionment that the safeness of certain district has a polarizing effect.

Most interesting was the discussion of Harold Ford, Jr., who was in the audience. He was held out as an exception to the rule, that despite the safeness of his Memphis district, Ford was willing to work in a bipartisan fashion.

Haley Barbour, though, subtly called a bit of shenanigans on that assertion noting that Ford, for a long time, had been looking at a statewide political future.

“He was thinking of Tennessee not some narrow congressional district,” explained Barbour.

The former Mississippi Governor also pointed out the reason why Governors seem to be less polarizing figures than those in Congress.

“Senators talk about doing things. Governors actually have to take action…Governors get judged on results. Period.”

The dean of journalism John Seigenthaler brought the panel to a close noting that while the word civility is not in the forty five words of the First Amendment, it is still nonetheless an important goal to strive for.

Seigenthaler emphasized that there is marked a coarseness in our political culture which is dangerous.

“When will the people say enough?” asked Seigenthaler. “Will we wait too long?”

SEE ALSO:
Andy Sher
WPLN

permalink | 26 Comments

Tags: Belmont Debate, Bernard Shaw, Harold Ford, Howard Baker, Phil Bredesen