What is Conservatism?

November 12, 2008

I’ve been hearing a lot about where this country is politically and I have to confess that I do not understand much of what is being said. Yesterday I heard a Republican say that “America is right of center.” I sincerely do not understand what that means. I presume that it was intended to mean that Americans support the Republican agenda, but the election offered little to support that position and polls uniformly show that the majority of us support the political issues advanced by so called “liberals” such as opposition to the Iraq war, health care revision, regulation of financial institutions, and establishing a trade balance.

It seems to me that the notions of conservative and liberal are indistinct to say the least with conservatives proposing dramatic changes to the society at least over the last eight years (I’m thinking tax reduction during a war, the “Bush Doctrine” which permits attacking other countries that might be a threat in the future, domestic warrantless surveillance, rendition, Guantanamo and the related human rights issues, abdication of federal oversight of financial institutions, stuff like that) and liberals advocating a return to a balanced budget and trade balance, and rolling back many of the recent changes implemented by the administration.

Another instance of this confusion about what is conservative and what is liberal is the recent Supreme Court case, argued Tuesday, in which the Court heard arguments about the FCC’s right to penalize “fleeting profanity.” The FCC for example fined PBS for airing interviews with old blues men who sometimes used the “s” word.

During oral argument it appeared that the “conservative” judges favored upholding the FCC’s right to control the use of any bad words, while the liberals seemed to disfavor this relatively mild form of censorship. In the courts conservatism is not marked by a philosophical opposition to governmental intrusion into our lives, as conservative judges tend to favor this type of censorship, to favor expansion of the police power and generally to disfavor using civil rights to limit the powers of government. At least in cases involving these competing interests the conservatives are more likely to be on the side of the government. On the other hand when government interferes with business, they are more likely to be on the side of business and the limitation of government.

This reminds me that when the constitution was adopted there was no bill of rights, to Thomas Jefferson’s great disappointment. The conservatives, who generally had opposed the inclusion of a bill of rights, coalesced into the Federalist Party which favored a strong federal government. Federalists were also much more pacifist than Jefferson’s following. I guess the conservatives on the bench take inspiration from John Adams and the Federalists at least in part. The conservatives of that era were for radical changes in the government to centralize and strengthen the power of the federal government.

The just finished presidential election illustrates the blur between conservative and liberal, as these terms are commonly used. McCain could not effectively distinguish his policies from those of Bush. McCain could not identify any bright lines that distinguished his policies from Obama and appealed to the voters. Eventually he seemed to stake his campaign on “character” issues, which to some degree is a euphemism for personal attacks. He did this is substantial part because he could not find the “right of center” where Republicans say most of us reside.

Senator Murray on Media Consolidation

February 13, 2008

I received this message from Senator Murray’s office concerning recent FCC activity:

As you know, the FCC recently voted to lift its decades-old restriction prohibiting a company from owning both television stations and newspapers in any one media market. Under the new plan, a newspaper could now own one television or radio station in the nation’s 20 largest media markets. But the FCC’s plan also makes it easier for a newspaper to buy a television station in the 190 other media markets.

I am very concerned about the way the FCC has rushed these changes with little real public input. That is why I am a cosponsor of S. 2332, the Media Ownership Act of 2007, which was introduced by Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND). This bill would set forth several steps that the FCC must go through before it could change any broadcast ownership regulations and would have required the FCC to slow down before it issued any decision on media ownership. Now that the FCC has acted, however, there will be a number of Congressional actions to prevent the new plan from going into place.

I believe diversity in media is key to having an informed democracy, and to maintain that diversity we must give consumers as many choices as possible regarding where and how they get their news. Congress must protect and defend America’s access to varied sources of news and information. Rest assured, I will continue to work to promote diversity over the publicly-owned airwaves as the 110th Congress progresses. Thank you for contacting me, and I hope to hear from you again soon.

I hope all is well in Seattle.