E-mail a friendDr. Kiron Skinner
original airdate November 7, 2006
Foreign policy expert Dr. Kiron Skinner is a professor at Carnegie Mellon University and a Hoover Institution research fellow. The Harvard Ph.D. is also a protégé of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and sits on the U.S. Defense Policy Board and the board of the National Security Education Program. While doing research for George Shultz's memoir, Dr. Skinner became interested in the story of the end of the Cold War, and subsequently became a scholar on former President Ronald Reagan.
Dr. Kiron Skinner
Tavis: Glad to have you with us for these critical midterm elections. I'm joined tonight by a terrific panel, beginning with Gray Davis, the former governor of the Golden State, and now with the law firm of Loeb and Loeb. Dr. Kiron Skinner is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, and an associate professor of history and political science at Carnegie-Mellon University.
Antonio Gonzalez is the president of the Southwest Voter Registration Education Project, the oldest Latino voting rights group in the U.S. And Sandra Tsing Loh is an award-winning writer and commentator heard frequently on National Public Radio and American Public Media.
I am delighted to have you all here for what I'm sure will be a diversity of thought, with a panel that really is, in fact, diverse. Imagine that? (Laugh) A diverse panel talking about politics on election night. Glad to have you all here. Governor, it's a pleasure to see you, sir.
Gray Davis: Tavis, nice to be with you.
Tavis: Thank you, sir. Let me start with your thoughts on Arnold Schwarzenegger, the projected winner. We've been listening to the rest of the country's political news, so now we know in California, of course, Arnold Schwarzenegger projected winner. What did Arnold do, how did Arnold pull this off as a Republican, when across the country tonight, clearly, so many other Republicans couldn't pull it off?
Davis: Well first of all, he hired a couple of people who used to work for me. (Laugh) One of whom is his chief of staff. Secondly, he took a much more moderate tone than the Republicans in Congress. He did sign a minimum wage bill. He does support stem cell research, and he did sign legislation curbing greenhouse gases. And none of those issues were taken up, much less passed, out of the Congress.
So, he embraced a Democratic agenda, and that's why his fortunes are going up, and many of the Republicans in Washington are going down.
Tavis: Are there lessons for other Republicans to learn from Governor Schwarzenegger?
Davis: Yeah. In a sentence, 'We elect you to work for us, not to lecture us. Don't tell us how to live. Don't tell us how to pray. Don't tell us what we should think. Just make our live better. Provide us opportunities, keep us safe.'
Tavis: There are projections at the moment that suggest that Democrats picked up, at the moment at least, about five governorships across the country?
Davis: Yeah, that's very exciting, as a former governor, because you can really make things happen in your state. And I think it's ironic that the sort of seat of the Bush victory in 2004 was Ohio, where they lost a Senate seat, and they lost a governorship. Ted Strickland won tonight in Ohio. So, that's a big statement from the middle of the country that we sent a signal in 2004, but we're sending a different signal. We want some Democrats in in 2006.
Tavis: Kiron, what do you make of that? That this state that, in fact, was the state that pushed Bush over the top in the last election and, at the same time, a state that has some controversy in it about the outcome of the election happens to be a place tonight that turns out two big-time Republicans?
Dr. Kiron Skinner: This is what we would expect in a mature democracy, where you have a mature electorate that's becoming increasingly sophisticated about the political process; that's evaluating its leaders. And so I embrace what's happened in Ohio as part of what we would want to happen in the United States. A takeover in the House; having a divided government.
Often you get good public policy when you have divided government. And again, as I've repeatedly said throughout this campaign, our framers wanted us to do exactly what we're doing now, and really challenge our leaders, especially the White House, when we see a kind of growth in power.
Tavis: Let me press you on your definition of 'maturity.' I could take that one of two ways. 'Mature' could be defined as wanting a balance of power, a separation of power in Washington. Or 'mature' could be defined n certainly two definitions, there are many more, I suspect n another definition could be that we have decided that we are sick and tired of the president's lying and spying and all his other mess, and we're gonna turn his friends out. So how do you define 'mature'?
Skinner: Well, I think it's some combination of both of those, and I don't think, what I mean by a 'mature democracy,' where there's just a deep level of enfranchisement and understanding of the issues, and really holding leaders to very high standards. And you often don't see that in transitional or early democracies. And so I think in our case now, we're really the beacon for the rest of the world. And so Ohio is a good example of how the electorate is not really hijacked or captured by one party or one set of leaders.
Tavis: Before I move on, Ken Mehlman said famously earlier this year to me on my public radio program that 2006 would be the year of the Black Republican. And yet, every major Black Republican running for high office tonight lost. How do you read that?
Skinner: Well, it was the year of the Black Republican. The fact that they were embraced by the RNC. That they will become much more integrated into the Republican Party. That they will serve on important committees. That they opened up a choice for voters is a victory tonight. So I do believe that Ken was right when he made that statement.
Tavis: Antonio, in Arizona, English-only appears to have won. I've said oftentimes what happens in California politically casts a long shadow or a long, bright sunbeam. Are you concerned that other states now will do what Arizona has done and start to pass English-only legislation, which many regard as, quite frankly, anti-immigrant?
Antonio Gonzalez: Well, Arizona, Tavis, is the front line of the anti-immigrant movement in the United States. It's not just there, where there are things like that being put on the ballot. There's lots of localities, something like 80, that are having anti-immigrant initiatives or measures or laws being passed. So Arizona sort of leads that, in a negative way, leads that polarization. Leads that anti-immigrant thrust across the country.
And it's a bad sign. Hopefully, though, with a new leadership, and at least one house of Congress, you'll have the opportunity for federal Congress to take leadership over what should be its issue instead of it having been played out in terms of a mob democracy scenario in localities. Maybe we can get some immigration reform leadership from Washington DC now.
Tavis: I know inside of Black America for the last week or so, while Democrats, Black Democrats, certainly have been giddy about what Democrats could, in fact, do tonight, and in fact now have done, which is to take back the House, if I've heard it once, I've heard it a million times. 'If Democrats win, Charlie Rangel is head of the House Ways and Means Committee. If Democrats win, John Conyers is head of the House Judiciary Committee.' Two African American members of Congress.
So that message has been played on Black radio, like, ad nauseum. Talk to me about what this victory for Democrats in the House means for Hispanics in leadership or running major committees. Who are you guys putting your money on now in terms of leadership? Are there equivalents to Charlie Rangels and John Conyers in your community?
Gonzalez: Not in the same way. The Latinos don't have the tenure in the House of Representatives that Blacks do, because they arrived in power later. But they certainly - a lot of people are gonna move up in ranks. Javier Pasera, J... Baca, Lucille Roybal-Allard. Those that came in in the early nineties are gonna move up. And you have, of course - Nancy Pelosi's gonna be the Speaker of the House, the first woman.
So you have sort of the Democratic coalition. Women, labor, minorities, moving up in ranks, taking leadership positions. And it's gonna be a challenge for them to really change course. 'Cause as you know, the unwritten story in this election is that Democrats didn't really run on a full agenda. They ran on, 'We're anything; we're not Bush. We're not Republicans.'
That was the agenda they ran on. It was the Pelosi strategy. It was successful, but now it's time to govern, at least in part. So they're gonna have to put forth an agenda. And if the Rangels and the Conyers have their way, I'm gonna be very happy, 'cause they're gonna run a progressive agenda.
Tavis: I wanna come back to that strategy, or lack thereof, in just a moment, after I talk to Sandra and ask her thoughts on the point that Antonio makes now about the first woman, who happens to be from the state of California, as the Speaker of the House. As a woman, how do you read that?
Sandra Tsing Loh: I think it's an exciting time to watch how women conduct themselves in politics. I'm a Democrat female; so we've watched Hillary Clinton sort of move to starting to go to Republican prayer meetings. And Dick Cheney congratulating. (Laugh) So you go, 'Huh, is Nancy Pelosi gonna be going to prayer.' Then I think it's fascinating to watch women politicians negotiate.
It used to be that we used to have to put them in a certain box. I know, again, as a Democrat female, people are going, 'Yeah, isn't it great that Hillary Clinton is so powerful,' and you go, 'But what about Condoleezza Rice?' It's often mentioned that she's not such a hero among the feminists, because she's on the Republican side. But I think in fact they're all really interesting, powerful women who have their politics n they make them up as they go. They don't have to be any which way. So I think Nancy n it's great. But it'll be interesting to see how she negotiates this new role.
Tavis: Let me come back, Governor, if I might, Governor Davis, to this notion that Antonio raises about the strategy here that Democrats employed to get elected, whatever that strategy is. And there'll be a thousand conversations about n millions of conversations n about this tomorrow; about that strategy. Obviously, it was effective to get back the House.
When you start to break down that strategy, though, I suspect what we're gonna find is that a lot of conservative Democrats in red states, and other places, won tonight to help put the Democrats back in power. Speaking of Ms. Pelosi, what kind of friction, what kind of tension, what is she gonna have to navigate with regard to trying to lead a party in the House that has amongst its ranks n that have a lot more conservative Democrats? Those are not her politics.
Davis: But she is the leader of the Congressional delegation that call themselves Democrats. And she and Robert Manuel were the authors of this strategy of finding Democrats who could win in a red state. We're a big country, and to win seats in Arkansas or Arizona or Ohio...
Tavis: Indiana.
Davis: Indiana. You have to find candidates that resonate in those states, but still have Democratic values; will vote to pass a minimum wage; will vote to sponsor stem cell research; will do the sorts of things that are on her agenda. And I think you'll find a much more progressive Congress, still fiscally responsible, but a big change from this crowd in Washington.
'Cause we don't have a minimum wage bill. We don't have anything on stem cell research. We don't have anything on greenhouse gases. There's been very little, the last year, even requiring cars to get more miles. They're essentially getting the same miles they got 20 years ago.
Common sense stuff is not getting done. If it's one thing we have to do in this country, it's develop alternative energy sources so that we're not so dependent on the Middle East for oil. 'Cause oil is driving energy policy, is driving our foreign policy.
Tavis: To that point, Kiron, let me ask you two questions. One, what you expect of the Democrats right away domestically. And to Governor Davis' point, what you expect or don't expect of Democrats with regard to foreign policy.
Skinner: Well, on the domestic side, I do believe the Democrats will work with President Bush to address the agenda that he put forth when he was reelected on entitlements, to get to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, to renew the No Child Left Behind Act. These are things that the president cares deeply about, that are on his agenda, and I do believe in a divided government. We will see that move forward because the Democrats have spoken so strongly in favor of addressing those issues.
On foreign policy, I'm deeply troubled, because yes, the Democrats won on an electoral strategy based on, 'Washington is the problem; the White House is the problem.' They made it national, not local. That was very clever and very successful. But underneath it, I see no deep strategizing for dealing with our competitors in the world. Russia, in 2005, spent more money for the first time since the collapse of the Soviet Union on arms sales to the developing world. It spent 700 million on surface-to-air missiles to Iran.
It's very, very troubling what's going on at the U.N., in terms of trying to bring Russia in for sanctions against the Iranian government. North Korea has sold ballistic missiles to other countries, is the leader in doing this. And I don't see a real strategy for addressing these issues, or a recognition, if I might add, that the irreconcilable wing of Islam is the fundamental problem in the world. Not the United States.
People hate us not because of who we are, but because of what, really, we stand for. And the irreconcilable wing of Islam is the problem, not the United States. And Democrats really have not come to terms with that fact.
Tavis: To that point, Antonio, I could be hopeful, as Kiron is, that in this divided government, that Democrats are going to work with the White House, and that things will continue, or at least start to move in a different direction in Washington. That's a hopeful view. Or I could take the other point of view, which is that Democrats are gonna be recalcitrant; they're gonna hold the line on the issues that they think are important to the American people.
Their mandate, they're going to say, is that the American people want a change in Washington. And so the president and Congress are going to go at it. Two different views; which one do you hold?
Gonzalez: I think that if the Democrats simply take the House of Representatives, then they're gonna have a much more limited agenda than if they take the House of Representatives and the Senate.
But I can't let what Kiron said go unaddressed. I don't think people hate us because of what we stand for. I think people hate us because we invade them.
And I think that's how Americans have, the hard way, come to learn, and that's why you have, really, Iraq policy being at the forefront of the Republicans and President Bush losing power, at least in the House of Representatives today, maybe in both Houses, in what is a sea change Houses, in what is a sea change (unintelligible).
Tavis: So let me ask you, then, to that point, then, do you expect, then, that we're going to see a wholesale change now in Iraq policy for one of two reasons; one, and-or two reasons. One, because the president at the White House tonight clearly understands that a message has been sent about Iraq policy. And of course tomorrow, he's gotta deal, in the coming weeks, at least, with a Congress that's controlled by Democrats.
Either one of those things, a message from the American public, and-or a message from the House, suggests to the president that things have to change. Is he going to get that message, or is he gonna continue to stay the course with Mr. Rumsfeld and company?
Gonzalez: Well, there's nothing in his performance as president to suggest that President Bush would change course, would reverse, would do what Governor Schwarzenegger did, to say, (laugh) 'I'm sorry for what I did. I made a mistake.' And then he morphed into Gray Davis, in essence. (Laugh) He adopted all of Gray's policies. (Laugh) There's nothing to suggest that George Bush will do that, looking at his presidency.
As a governor in Texas, he did do that. But frankly, I think that was a different time and a different place. And I think we're looking for some confrontation. That's what's gonna happen. There's gonna be some confrontation, and I think that the Democrats, if they're smart, are gonna fulfill the few promises they made. Push stem cell; push prescription drug relief; push global warming. And their contradiction is the people that just elected them want change in Iraq. But they don't have a policy; they don't have a consensus on getting the troops out, as a party.
Tavis: Sandra, Kiron make a point earlier that I wanna come back to, that the Democrats did a really good job of nationalizing this election, which is an interesting juxtaposition to what we are taught in political science class, courtesy of Tip O'Neill, former Speaker of the House, that all politics is local. Were you surprised, were you concerned, that this election did not seem to be about local issues in the way that many midterm elections are, but was, in fact, a referendum on national policies coming out of the White House and a Republican Congress?
Loh: Well, again, we're from California, where, again, we had 50 propositions on our ballots, and a Republican government. So we weren't, I have to say, in California where I voted, it didn't quite feel that, although we were reading the news and seeing what was going on across the country. I do think that with the Democrats controlling the House, it can only be a good thing.
Because if you have a Republican president, Republican Senate, and a Republican House, it kind of moves unchecked, and it's kind of bad for government, 'cause nobody's checking them. And so they're running off in their n all to the right.
And just sometimes when I think back over the last few years, like, sometimes, like, Terri Schiavo. What was that about? That there were so many issues (laugh) (unintelligible), what country are we living in that this is somehow setting the national discussion? Terri n it seems surrealistic sometimes, living in this country.
And I was thinking also, going back to something you were saying, I had heard a really interesting theory recently that if 9/11 had not happened, then George Bush would have been the great American, Latino American president, because back there as the governor of Texas, if you remember what he was, he was completely interested in the immigration issue. Was very interested in Mexico, those ties.
That would have been a totally different presidency, had that not happened. And I think that's a really interesting theory, how much differently things would have gone.
Tavis: I gotta jump in right quick, I got the chairman of the Democratic Party standing by. I wanna go to him in two seconds. Stand by, Dr. Dean; I'm coming in two seconds. Let me ask you right quick, Governor Davis, since I might not get back to you, what conversations in earnest do you think the White House ought to be having tomorrow? They can put their heads in the sand is one option, or they can have a sincere, earnest conversation about what these election results mean.
What ought they be talking about in the Oval Office come tomorrow morning?
Davis: Well clearly, people voted in record numbers because they wanted change. They're tired of tuition costs going up, healthcare costs going up. If they had a pension, that being chipped away at. They're n most Americans lives are not getting better. They're getting more complicated, more expensive, and they feel like they're sliding backwards. So those kinds of issues to prescription drugs, minimum wage, and other issues have to be dealt with. And I think there'll be some accommodation from the White House on that.
On foreign policy, there has to be some reconciliation with what we're doing in Iraq. Clearly, the president's play-calling is not working. As I said, he's a quarterback calling the play. Every play is losing ground. We have to try a different play. I don't know precisely what it is, but it has to be some combination of telling the Iraqis, 'This is your country, fight for it as hard as we fought for you. We'll stick around and help you, but it's now your task.'
Tavis: Dr. Dean, are you with me, sir?
Howard Dean: I am; thank you.
Tavis: How are you?
Dean: I'm still awake.
Tavis: (Laugh) I'm waiting for you just to scream out, 'I'm going to Disneyland.' (Laugh) So you won tonight.
Dean: We'll be happy with a majority chamber.
Tavis: You won big. How do you feel?
Dean: Good. A little tired, but the House looks like it's definitely gonna be a Democrat House, and I think Nancy Pelosi, a good Californian, will be a very good speaker. And the Senate is still very, very tight. We're still hopeful that Harold Ford may pull it out. And we believe that Jim Webb is gonna win. So we need two out of the next three states, which is Tennessee, Montana and Missouri. So it's gonna be very close.
Tavis: When you were last on this program, I asked you what it would say if the Democrats couldn't win, with all the cards you got stacked in favor, in your deck this time around. I asked you what it would say if you couldn't win. So you have, in fact, won, at least, the House. So what does it say?
Dean: Well, I think it says a bunch of things. First of all, the American people want a new direction, and that's what they're gonna get, at least as far as we're concerned, to our ability to influence this president. Secondly, one of the things that pleases me the most is we've won some seats in places that we don't normally win seats. And it's gonna be our job over the next year and a half to cement those gains, work really hard in those districts.
One of the mistakes I think the Democrats have made for quite a while is to not reach out to places like Nebraska and Kansas and some of the n even the red areas in California, where we give seats away for free to the Republicans. Well, now we have a great opportunity to show Americans that all those things that the Republicans have been saying about us for all these years simply aren't true.
That the fact of the matter is we balance budgets, that we know how to govern, and that we know how to listen to people, which is something that I think the president's party has fallen down on.
Tavis: Respectfully, you're smiling tonight, Dr. Dean, about picking up Democratic seats in states and places where you don't normally pick them up. You may be crying in a few days. And the argument simply goes like this. You guys picked up seats tonight because a lot of conservative Democrats helped you do that, but that means that now you have a leader in the House whose politics have to be reconciled with an increasing number of conservative Democrats. To say nothing of the fact that, as you head into 2008, you've got a party that doesn't know who it really is.
Dean: Tavis, I don't quite think that's true. And I think Nancy Pelosi is gonna be a really good Speaker, and I mean that. And you know I don't say things I don't mean. I'll tell you why. I expect n particularly if the Senate doesn't go our way n I expect you'll see a pretty narrow agenda that everybody can agree on. Minimum wage; anti-corruption legislation. I think you'll see some middle class tax fairness.
I think you'll try to see us rescind all those tax breaks that the oil companies got, so we can use that money to start to balance the budget and restore Pell grants. And then I think, and I hope, that you're gonna see some kind of down payment on universal healthcare. We certainly can't retool the whole healthcare system, but we can do some simple things, as we did in my state when I was governor to guarantee health insurance, at least to people under 25.
So, that's a fairly narrow agenda. I don't think you're gonna see us get into all the divisive social issues, and those kinds of things.
Tavis: Do you feel personally vindicated? They laughed at your 50-state strategy, and said it wouldn't work.
Dean: Well, look, I don't take credit just for the 50-state strategy working. I think Robert Manuel and Chuck Schumer had a hell of a lot to do with this. They really worked like crazy; they raised a ton of money. But sure, the 50-state strategy is essential for the long-term survival of the party. You can't be a national party unless you're in every state. We were in every state, and I think we were very helpful in some races that are surprising us tonight.
Tavis: What does this mean for n I know you're not prepared to think about it, but humor me for just a second n what does tonight mean for 2008?
Dean: I think it helps us. I think you'll see a much more balanced government. I think the president has a terrific choice to make and a very difficult choice. Will he work with us? Or will he not? He has been incredibly dismissive of 50 percent of the American population. We're not gonna do that. We're gonna try to work with everybody. Everybody has good ideas. We'll disagree with some of them, but we'll work respectfully with others. And now it's up to the president to see if he can meet those conditions.
Tavis: I've got 20 seconds. So you wanted this; you now have the opportunity. Are you guys ready?
Dean: Oh, we're ready. We're ready. We've hoped for this for a long time, and we've worked really hard for it. But the people who did this were the American people, and that's who we owe.
Tavis: Dr. Howard Dean, as always, nice to have you on. Congratulations; we'll be talking, I'm sure, in the coming days.
Dean: Thanks, Tavis.
Tavis: Thank you for the opportunity to talk to you. Governor Gray Davis, nice to have you here as well.
Davis: Tavis, my pleasure.
Tavis: Dr. Kiron Skinner, Antonio Gonzalez, Sandra Tsing Loh, nice to have you all here. Thank you for your insight and for a wonderful conversation. I'm glad to have you here.
Back to November 7, 2006