There’s been plenty of controversy surrounding the Dems’ decision to give Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine the chance to deliver the party’s response to Bush’s SOTU, but Bruce Reed says it doesn’t matter, because it’s doomed to fail.
Consider the inherent disadvantages. First, it’s a ten-minute rebuttal to an hour-long speech. By the time the opposition leader speaks, the television audience is desperate to go to sleep or change the channel to Sports Center.
Kevin Drum agrees, noting the inherent problem with settings.
[E]ither insist that the rebuttal speaker be allowed to speak in front of an audience or else just pack it in. The current format is so bad that I’m convinced it does the opposition party more harm than good.
The New Republic’s T. A. Frank, meanwhile, notes some history that I hadn’t heard before and recommends Dems start thinking outside the box.
Oh, for the Democrats of yore. This year marks the fortieth anniversary of the tradition of giving airtime to the opposition party; and back in the 1970s and ’80s, Democrats did show some creativity in planning their responses. When Nixon was in office, they attempted a variety of formats, from staging man-on-the-street interviews with voters to convening a panel of politicians to answer questions from members of a studio audience and callers who could dial in to a toll-free number (“a novel feature,” noted The New York Times). In 1982, the first year that a rebuttal was broadcast immediately following the president’s speech, Democrats even unveiled a 28-minute documentary produced by media guru Robert Squier. Entitled “The State of the Union: A Democratic View,” the documentary featured narration, polling data, various Democratic stars, and interviews with citizens in Washington, Memphis, Detroit, Dearborn, and Sacramento…. [W]hen Squier presented his television ideas to Tip O’Neill in 1982, the House Speaker reportedly said, “Great idea, let’s do it!” — before the presentation was even finished.
For some reason, though, Democrats called off any attempts to be interesting in the late 1980s. George Bush the Elder would be followed by Tom Foley or George Mitchell alone in an otherwise-quiet room–perhaps the most serious abuse of television the medium has tolerated. Not that Republicans ever got much better. In 1996, Bob Dole gave a rebuttal speech so ungraceful that he later admitted, “I gave a fireside chat the other night, and the fire went out.” But just because Republicans are bad at rebuttals doesn’t mean Democrats shouldn’t try to be better. They might want to remember that it’s permissible to be craftier at something once in a while, even if it’s a break with current custom.
Good idea; the current customs are breathtakingly dull.
Put aside, for a moment, whether the Dem response should go to Kaine, John Murtha, John Kerry, Al Franken, me, or anybody else. If it’s yet another speech, in the same old setting, it doesn’t matter. No one will watch and no one will care.
TNR’s Frank offers some suggestions for breaking out of the traditional format.
[H]ow about broadcasting simultaneously from several places around the country? Or from around the world? Filming from New Orleans or Baghdad might punch things up a little. Why not interview seniors about the disaster of the Medicare prescription drug plan? Why not speak to Katrina survivors about promises unkept by the White House? Al Gore apparently has a slide show on global warming that’s got people buzzing — why not bring him in? Or Barack Obama? How about getting a large enthusiastic audience that will make noise and cheer and laugh, creating an aura of confidence and good spirits surrounding the party? Why not have a couple of professional gag writers on hand who might be able to seize on something in the president’s speech that lends itself to a deflating witticism? Above all, why not try something?
We have the entire liberal Hollywood elite in our corner; we can’t get some quality video together? Maybe Aaron Sorkin could write a script. Maybe it could be something funny that people would remember — and find entertaining.
I kind of doubt that Kaine will have a big surprise tonight. I’m sure he’ll deliver a nice speech with nice sentiments. I’m also sure it won’t make a whole lot of difference.
Maybe next year?