Republican war cry should be welcome

28 January 2004

The most amazing line of the week comes from Phil Johnston, chair of the state's Democratic Party, who said of Mitt Romney's effort to elect Republicans: "He's declared war on the Legislature."

Not on Democrats, mind you, but the Legislature. It's a telling comment. In the mind of the state's highest party official, the two are conflated: The Democratic Party IS the Legislature and the Legislature IS the Democratic Party. A challenge to one is a challenge to the other.

If Republicans were to make this claim about George W. Bush - that running against him amounted to an assault on the presidency itself - they rightfully would be mocked. Politicians aren't dictators, and in a democracy, anyone has the right to run against an incumbent.

But, apparently, not so in Massachusetts.

Since 1952 - the last year they controlled the Legislature - it's been a long, slow slide for the Republican Party. Sure, there have been some blips (such as in 1990), but right now the numbers are pathetic: just 23 Republicans in the 140-member House and six in the 40-member Senate.

All of this has caused think-tanks and pundits to worry about the future of state politics. Mickey Edwards, former Republican congressman from Oklahoma and now at Harvard's Kennedy School, wrote a withering critique in 2000, calling the state GOP "a basket case." It was the party's own fault, he argued: It cared little for local races, was enamored with its control of the governorship and was torn by internal dissension.

And, some argued, this was bad for Democrats as well. With monopoly control, the party became (or at least was perceived as) arrogant and disconnected from the public, more in love with power and its perquisites than with public policy and its consequences.

Enter Mitt Romney and, with him, Darrell Crate, the GOP's new chair, and Dominic Ianno, its executive director. Romney postured himself as a reformer who had no interest in going along to get along. He said to do his job he needed to get more Republicans elected and set in motion a plan to unite the GOP and focus on its grassroots.

The early signs have been good. This year, for example, about 100 Republican candidates will run for the Legislature; in previous years, the number has averaged 76, according to Ianno.

The first test of this strategy comes on March 2.

That's the date of a special election to fill the seat of retiring Sen. Cheryl Jacques (D-Needham). The GOP thought it had reason for optimism. Jacques' predecessors were Republicans. In 2002, Romney won 59 percent of her district's vote. And the six-man (and yes, it is all men) Democratic field is fragmented and largely unknown.

Meanwhile, the GOP has united behind popular and telegenic Rep. Scott Brown (R-Wrentham). Romney has already appeared at campaign events and, after the Feb. 3 primary, he and other Republican heavies will doubtless appear at many more.

Given this, one would think Brown the odds-on favorite to win. But in a controversial move, Democrats forced the general election to be held on the same date as the presidential primary. That's like voting on the merits of a vegetarian diet at a convention of meatpackers (while few will turn out for Bush's uncontested primary, the Democrats have a battle that is sure to draw throngs of voters).

In fact, the timing of the election is so clearly unfair that the Democrats' too-cute move could end up backfiring. In which case, Brown still might win.

But even if he does, can the GOP ever realize its real plan - to boost its numbers so significantly that it can sustain a veto or, in its wildest dreams, control a majority of votes?

Only if Democrats continue to do things like treating a run against them as something akin to treason.

There are really two reasons to vote GOP. One is to inject competition into the system. The second is because you agree with them.

The first certainly accounts for Romney's victory in 2002. Voters are wary of one party having too much control and see a Republican governor as a needed check.

But that only goes so far. At a local level, policy and ideology begin to matter more as voters look for a representative who mirrors their own inclinations. And it's here that the GOP has a problem. Like it or not, Massachusetts is not a conservative state. As long as the power of the Democratic Party itself is not the issue, voters here will vote Democratic.

Which is why Johnston and the Democratic Party need to tone down their defensiveness. All that does is give ammunition to Republicans who claim Democrats have too much control. Paradoxically, it may be that the best way for Democrats to win is to welcome the competition from the other side and meet it head on.

Talk back to Tom Keane at TomKeane@TomKeane.com.