Dow Jones Interactive

EDITORIAL
Op-Ed; Winner must move the middle ground
THOMAS M. KEANE JR.

10/30/2002
Boston Herald
All Editions
025
(Copyright 2002)

What is it about Barbara Johnson, Carla Howell and Jill Stein that makes them fringe candidates?

In Johnson's case, the answer is obvious. With her eccentric mannerisms, dress and ideas, wrapped up in a voice so gravelly it would make Lauren Bacall sound like Shirley Temple, Johnson has provided good comic relief - but little else - in the gubernatorial debates.

But Howell and Stein present themselves more seriously. They talk about issues and ideas. Each has a coherent political philosophy. Moreover, unlike Shannon O'Brien and Mitt Romney, they haven't allowed themselves to descend into name-calling.

But they're still fringe candidates. Why? Because O'Brien and Romney speak to the values and aspirations of middle-class voters. Howell and Stein do not. And it is the middle class that dominates politics today - without their votes, a candidate doesn't have a chance.

Depending on who's counting, about 70 percent to 75 percent of Americans describe themselves as middle class. And in general, they're happy. Gallup polls, for example, show that the vast majority of people are pleased with their standard of living.

Howell's message doesn't resonate with this group. Partly that's because she's easy to caricature: guns for all, taxes for none. But Howell actually offers a well-developed philosophy: Libertarianism. For her, Question 1 - the referendum she's pushing that would eliminate the state income tax - isn't simply a way of reducing the tax burden. Rather, her hope is that starved of money, government itself would shrink. Medicaid would disappear; government regulation would end; education, ideally, would be privately funded. As Howell herself notes, she supports small government: "Every issue. Every time. No exceptions. No excuses."

Libertarianism has a certain intellectual appeal, particularly for those who fancy themselves independent, go-it-alone types. Howell's problem - and the reason she remains on the fringe - is that hardly anyone is Massachusetts shares her abhorrence of government. In fact, most people like it.

Middle-class citizens appreciate the need for a robust and active public sector. They don't have enough wealth to insulate themselves from small reversals of fortune. They remember when they, or their parents, were struggling; their middle-class status is a fragile thing. They worry they could lose their jobs or get sick. They like public schools and public transportation. They want to make sure that when they are old, someone is around to help them if needed.

They complain about government, of course, but they do so in the sense that they wish it was better at what it does. They don't simply want it to go away.

Jill Stein doesn't want government to go away, either. Just the opposite. The Green Party, popular in Europe, is socialism with an environmental face. It grounds itself in the ethos of class struggle, it's hostile to capitalism and is distrustful of U.S. foreign policy (for example, it opposed the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan).

Stein has been unabashed about what she would do as governor: Taxes would go up, school reform would be reversed, and the state would provide health care for all.

And the reason that Stein is on the fringe? As much as middle- class voters reject Howell's no-government libertarianism, they don't buy into Stein's big-government, left-wing ideals either. Middle-class voters are partial to free markets. They don't believe in class warfare. They want a safety net but they don't want it to be claustrophobic. They tend to be tolerant on social issues but tight-fisted on economic matters. And most fundamentally, they buy into the notion that what government should be about is helping the middle class to grow and thrive.

And, broadly speaking, that's what O'Brien and Romney think as well.

That's not to say there's no difference between O'Brien and Romney. On some issues - such as bilingual education and the death penalty - they are clearly apart. On others, there are differences in emphasis and stress. And each as well holds allegiances to differing interest groups.

Yet it is remarkable the degree to which the major party candidates are alike, whether it's on taxes (skeptical), education reform (in favor), health care (piecemeal reforms) or housing (boost supply). Even on abortion and gays, both are roughly in the same place: pro-choice and tolerant.

That's why, come Nov. 5, Howell, Stein and (it almost goes without saying) Johnson will end up with an insignificant number of votes. Middle-class voters are looking for a governor who can improve their lives without rocking the boat. With either O'Brien or Romney, they can be pretty sure that's what they'll get.

Tom Keane can be reached at tomkeane@tomkeane.com.

Caption: JILL STEIN: Thinks coherently but so far left that she's off the map.