Aside from the presidential election, the political battle that intrigues me the most this year is the race between Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown (R) and Harvard Professor Elizabeth Warren (D) for Ted Kennedy’s old seat in the U.S. Senate. I’ve been fascinated by both of these impressive individuals for several years, as it seems to me that they represent the best and the worst that their parties have to offer these days.
Scott Brown is a self-made man who came from humble and challenging beginnings. His parents divorced when he was an infant, after which his mother had to go on welfare. He was physically abused by his stepfathers and sexually abused by a camp counselor (who threatened to kill him if he told anyone…the experience was so traumatic that he didn’t even tell his family about it until he wrote his autobiography in 2010). He also was arrested for shoplifting when he was in his early teens…but fortunately for him, the judge he faced managed to get his attention and turn him toward a better path.
You can tell that this isn’t a stereotypical tale of some Republican WASP from a patrician background. Brown had it tough. But he was a smart guy, and he got his shot through a good education, earning his bachelor’s and law degrees from two of Massachusetts’ finest universities. He worked as a model and joined the National Guard, eventually making his way into politics via the state legislature. Along the way, he met and married a charismatic TV news broadcaster and raised two impressive daughters with her in what by all accounts is a strong and happy family.
So Brown was already living the American Dream when a big opportunity opened up for him in 2009. Senator Kennedy passed away as Congress was debating the President’s controversial health care bill, and Brown suddenly had the chance to run for a seat that few “insiders” thought the Republicans would actually win. Lo and behold, he proved the naysayers wrong! Aided by President Obama’s massive mistakes, he won a mandate from the voters of Massachusetts to oppose health care “reform” and skyrocketing deficits.
But here’s the thing: by and large, Brown won that seat the right way. He acknowledged the legitimate concerns of the surging Tea Partiers but didn’t pander to their every whim. He ran a strong campaign with a clear message, and he leveled with the voters about his support for policies that were unpopular in many quarters (e.g. backing the Wall Street bailouts, or approving of “enhanced interrogation” measures). Basically, he positioned himself as a reasonable, moderate Northeastern Republican who is willing to compromise when necessary (much like his in-state ally Mitt Romney).
Elizabeth Warren also came from a humble beginnings and also had to overcome childhood adversity. Her father worked hard as a janitor in Oklahoma City. But he suffered a heart attack when Elizabeth was twelve, and his family learned just how quickly a middle-class family can find itself in difficult financial straits. Warren had to work as a waitress in her teens just to help her parents make ends meet…but she too was quite bright, and she earned a full-ride debate scholarship to George Washington University when she was only 16! She then went on to earn her law degree from Rutgers.
Warren eventually accepted a teaching position at the University of Houston Law Center. And as a hard-working single mother raising several kids, she found herself quite offended when Congress passed a law in 1978 that made it much easier for citizens to declare bankruptcy. It seemed to her that these people were just taking advantage of everyone else, instead of pulling together to do the right thing (like her family had done in her childhood).
So she set out to prove her argument. But she had a big change of heart while doing her research, as she discovered that the majority of bankruptcies in this country are due to lost jobs, broken families, and — far too often — debilitating medical illnesses. The problems of the bankrupt were much more about circumstance than character…and those problems were getting worse. Times were tough for blue-collar and white-collar workers alike in the late 70′s/early 80′s, and Warren discovered that her real passion was to become their advocate in the academic world. She did so quite successfully, and she rode that passion straight to a tenured professorship at Harvard Law School.
Warren was probably most known for her insightful and thought-provoking book The Two-Income Trap (2003) when the financial crisis broke in 2008. But over the past several years, she has become even better known as one of Wall Street’s most vocal and effective critics, first as the no-nonsense chair of the TARP Oversight Panel and then as a driving force behind the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. But after President Obama caved in to Wall Street and passed her over for the Bureau’s directorship, his party approached her with a big offer…their support to challenge one of Wall Street’s favorite Republicans for the Senate seat he took from the Kennedys!
She eagerly agreed to run, setting up a battle of state heavyweights in 2012. And that, my friends, pretty much brings us up to date. So, let’s sum up…
Senator Brown is a good man who has been an advocate for reasonable, center-right approaches to the country’s problems. But he’s also in bed with Wall Street and big business interests that have gone “far too far” in pushing agendas that are doing great harm to America’s middle class. Yes, I get that they have to compete in a very tough and highly “globalized” marketplace. But that doesn’t mean that only their interests should matter.
Professor Warren is a good woman who has repeatedly and effectively stood up for the middle-class voters who suffer because of those interests. But she also refuses to call out the limousine liberals who make a up a major portion of that bloc (and whose agendas hurt the middle class in other ways as well). And as I mentioned recently, we’ve just discovered that her dishonesty about her heritage may have played a major role in her fast-rising academic career.
Scott Brown too often advocates for the wrong people, but he does so honestly and openly. Elizabeth Warren advocates for the right people, but she too often does so dishonestly and partially.
That right there says so much about what’s wrong in America today: good people going the wrong way. As I’ve said before, the problems we face as a nation are primarily moral in nature. Most of us sense that at a deep level, even if we sometimes struggle to explain clearly why we feel that way. And that is why we must have a serious discussion about shared moral values before we can hope to find the common ground necessary for real solutions.
As for these two…well, I think it’s more likely than not that Scott Brown will win re-election to the Senate in November, especially given the weak state of the Democratic Party this year, along with the rather lackluster manner in which Warren has run her campaign. And I’m OK with that. For the time being, I’ll take the honest but somewhat misguided guy over the the well-meaning but somewhat dishonest gal who is keeping close company with them that seek to rule over our lives in any manner they see fit…and who believe that “anything goes” so long as it advances their agenda.
I don’t expect politicians to be saints. But I do expect them to be at least reasonably honest about their professional lives and their political agendas. And is it so much to ask them to actually represent the interests of the voters who elect them alongside the contributors who finance them??
What we need is a third side — an in-the-middle side — that combines the best that the Browns and Warrens of this country have to offer while doing away with (at least) the worst. What we need is the return of centrist governance, as we had in the brightest days of the Greatest Generation!
But in the meantime, I salute Brown and Warren for representing the best of the parties (along with the worst), and I look forward to watching how their contest plays out. Next week, I want to start taking an in-depth look at how the Obama vs. Romney race stacks up (hint: not well for the President).
I’ll catch you again on Friday with the weekly recap. Ciao!
{ 9 comments }
