Features » May 2, 2014
It’s Not All About November
With all their political gamesmanship, lawmakers forget that real human lives are often on the line.
Birth defects and toxic pollution—this is serious and macabre stuff. You might therefore think that politicians would refrain from portraying such issues as important only for how they might affect the next election.
It is hardly controversial to say that one of the big turnoffs about American politics is its disconnect with even the most grim human consequences. No matter how serious the issue, the political class seems pathologically determined to present everything as a fun-and-games, red-versus-blue battle whose only important consequences have to do with the next election. As politicians, operatives and reporters focus primarily on the horse-race discussion of ever-more-grave issues, the life-and-death human ramifications for millions of people are effectively written out of our democratic discourse.
There are plenty of examples of this odious dynamic, but perhaps this era's textbook case comes from a recent article in Politico magazine about natural gas exploration in Colorado—and more specifically, the extractive process known as fracking.
The context for the article is key: It appeared only weeks after the release of a Colorado School of Public Health study showing a potential link between birth defects and proximity to Colorado fracking sites. That study followed others showing possible links between fracking in Colorado and health hazards such as water and air pollution.
Birth defects and toxic pollution—this is serious and macabre stuff. You might therefore think that politicians would refrain from portraying such issues as important only for how they might affect the next election. You might also think that even the most hardened politicos would be sure to at least pay lip service to the idea that actual lives—not just professional politicians' careers—are at stake.
But, of course, you would be wrong.
Over the course of Politico's 2,500-word article, there are only scant mentions of health implications. Instead, the piece teems with quotes from various Colorado pols about a ballot measure to let communities regulate fracking. Most of those quotes, though, aren't about whether that ballot measure will help protect ordinary people from being poisoned. They are about political prevarication and whether the ballot measure will help or hurt the electoral chances of Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) and U.S. Senator Mark Udall (D-Colo.).
In one exchange, for instance, Hickenlooper casts the issue as just another bloodless matter of tactics and economics. “Striking the right balance between local control and private property rights is the next big challenge,” he said.
In another section, Hickenlooper's chief of staff casts the ballot measure not as addressing an extraction practice possibly imperiling young children, but one primarily imperiling politicians. “It’s like setting off a grenade in a closet—you never know if someone’s going to get killed,” he said—the “killed” being the politicians' election chances, not the masses of ordinary Coloradans possibly being harmed.
But the most revealing quote of all came from Republican Josh Penry, a failed gubernatorial candidate now working in the fossil fuel industry. Despite all the news of birth defects and health problems, he caustically depicted the entire issue as merely of concern to professional officeholders, gleefully claiming the ballot measure is “a slow motion train wreck for Mark Udall and every other Democrat up and down the ballot.”
I could go on, but I won't. This display of arrogance and self-absorption from Colorado's political class is but a microcosmic example. Indeed, no matter where you are reading this column, there are examples of real-life catastrophes with real-life ramifications being treated by political elites as just more “grenades” in their self-serving political wars.
In those wars, social emergencies are treated as partisan battlefields, and politicians are the field generals using human beings as cannon fodder. Worst of all, life-and-death crises are now viewed exclusively as political weapons rather than as pressing problems that need to be solved.
What do you want to see from our coverage of the 2020 presidential candidates?
As our editorial team maps our plan for how to cover the 2020 Democratic primary, we want to hear from you:
It only takes a minute to answer this short, three-question survey, but your input will help shape our coverage for months to come. That’s why we want to make sure you have a chance to share your thoughts.
David Sirota, an In These Times senior editor and syndicated columnist, is a staff writer at PandoDaily and a bestselling author whose book Back to Our Future: How the 1980s Explain the World We Live In Now—Our Culture, Our Politics, Our Everything was released in 2011. Sirota, whose previous books include The Uprising and Hostile Takeover, co-hosts "The Rundown" on AM630 KHOW in Colorado. E-mail him at firstname.lastname@example.org, follow him on Twitter @davidsirota or visit his website at www.davidsirota.com.
if you like this, check out:
- The Shocking Lack of Diversity on State Supreme Courts
- Which Candidates’ Climate Plans Put Justice First? We Break It Down.
- How Dare Samantha Power Scrub the Yemen War From Her Memoir
- Whose Grid? Our Grid! Chicago’s Campaign To Put Electricity Under Public Control
- Joe Biden Lied His Face Off About the Iraq War