Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

As the candidates look to the West, a series of myths have developed about Western politics.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Rocky Mountain Realities

By David Sirota, Creators Syndicate. Posted February 1, 2008.


As the candidates look to the West, a series of myths have developed about Western politics.
Advertisement

When I told my East Coast friends a few years ago that I was going to live in Montana, they were stunned. "Isn't that near Nebraska?" one wondered. ("Yes, relative to Washington, D.C.," I replied). Another New York friend recently sneered about my move last year to Colorado. "I'd never move to Denver," she said. "It's a B-list city."

Some friends, right?

But, as most Westerners know, such condescension is commonplace because this eight-state inland expanse between California and Kansas is often portrayed in our political culture as a backwater.

National journalists pen their occasional on-location dispatches from the West with self-congratulatory tones, suggesting they equate a visit here to an act of bravery -- as if this were a war zone. Parties brag about plotting special "Western strategies" -- like sci-fi armies planning assaults on alien planets. Through it all, the West is cast as a hinterland.

Normally, this region is totally ignored. But now, Rocky Mountain states are taking center stage in the February 5th nominating contests and the general election. With the South stymieing Democrats and the Northeast rejecting Republicans, the West is 2008's big prize.

To compete for Western votes, every Republican presidential candidate is likening himself to Ronald Reagan -- politics' version of a cowboy. On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton's campaign has been labeling Barack Obama "the black candidate," as the Associated Press reported -- an effort designed to stoke ugly impulses among the area's white-flighters. Obama is countering with an outsider appeal to frontier independence.

But which candidates win the Rocky Mountains will be less about who is Reaganesque, racially divisive or rhetorically gifted, and more about who ignores the red-versus-blue fictions and appreciates some nuanced truths about this storied place. Consider the myth that Western "red states" reflexively support right-wing national security policies. This storyline was most famously forwarded by New York Sen. Charles Schumer (D) when in 2006 he attacked fellow Democrats working to end the Patriot Act. He said, "To let lapse would be a disaster, particularly for our Democrats in red states."

Schumer's comments came despite legislatures in "red states" like Montana, Colorado and Idaho passing bipartisan bills condemning the Patriot Act for restricting civil liberties.

Then again, others fail to comprehend that this Western libertarianism is limited. In an overstatement typical of national pundits, New York Post columnist Ryan Sager proclaimed that Rocky Mountain voters cling to a "leave-me-alone philosophy when it comes to government." Except on lots of issues, that's false.

For example, OpenLeft.com's Paul Rosenberg discovered that when it comes to budgets, the Rocky Mountain West actually wants the government to stop leaving it alone. Specifically, he found roughly three-quarters of Westerners polled by the General Social Survey believe government spends too little on domestic priorities. In fact, many Western incumbents are re-elected on pledges to bring more government money home -- a promise they largely fulfill considering most Western states receive more cash from Washington than they contribute. Meanwhile, Montana, Nevada and Arizona voters have passed ballot measures raising the minimum wage -- a government mandate if ever there was one.

The fairy tales are endless. Congressional debates imply that the West's most precious resources are oil and gas. But to many locals, the area's most valuable commodity is water.

Commentators have claimed Bill Clinton's 1992 victory in four Western states is not only proof of his political genius, but also of the region's devotion to Clintonism -- an ideology that sold out the middle class with initiatives like NAFTA. Somehow, everyone forgets that Ross Perot used a populist indictment of both parties' corporate sycophancy to take 1.4 million Western votes from George H. W. Bush.

But perhaps the biggest misconception is the belief that the West is a strange, Siberia-like realm -- square-state "flyover" country separate from the rest of America.

Sure, had you walked among the belt buckles and boots at Denver's annual Western Stock Show last week, you certainly would have seen some unique styles. But looking at the event's diverse crowd, chatting with National Guardsmen at a recruiting stand, listening to vendors and buyers haggle -- watching regular people be regular people -- you would have also seen that this place is just like the rest of the nation: complex and not easily stereotyped.

The candidates who understand that fundamental reality will be the ones Westerners reward at the polls.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: election08, western states

David Sirota is a nationally syndicated weekly newspaper columnist for Creators Syndicate. He is the New York Times bestselling author of Hostile Takeover: How Big Money and Corruption Conquered Our Government and How We Take It Back (Crown 2006). He is also a senior fellow at the Campaign for America's Future and a board member of the Progressive States Network. His second book, The Uprising, is due in the Spring of 2008.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
East Coast are region-bigots
Posted by: janvdb on Feb 1, 2008 7:54 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They just can't deal with the reality that Intermountain Westerners are just as complex, just as intelligent, just as informed, just as EVERYTHING that they are -- and far more slender and fit.

We get outside more. Ski more. Hike more.

Live more.

And, here in the West, we can live without the feuding Irish and Italian mini-mafiasos swaggering around the garbage cans quoting dialog from The Godfather like anyone still cares about that trash 30 years later, without the fossilized corrupt local governments and the sex-harassing and bribe-taking building inspectors, without the ancient race antagonisms, without the snooty, nervous little class stratification fetishes, without the white ghettos, without the crappy weather and roads covered with de-icers which have eaten the bottoms out of half the cars on the road, without the pre-WWII, crumbling, creaking, grafitti-covered bridges, without the ugly, rotting, filthy old cities filled with empty factory buildings, without the whole ugly, grey, has-been mess called the East Coast.

Yeah, life is pretty nice out here without all that.

But don't tell anyone. The West is Westerners' secret -- we don't want any more of you coming here and messing it up.

Stay where you are. Please. Give us just a bit more time to pass more land use regulations to make buying here more expensive -- we need to keep out your riffraff.

Your rich only, please. If you have a couple million to drop for a house in the pines, OK. Buy it, build it, then leave it empty except for two weeks a year. Works for us. Otherwise, stay at home with your garbage cans.

Jan VanDenBerg

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ast Coast are region-bigots Posted by: Thought Criminal 9
There's a lot that the east and west actually have in common
Posted by: maxpayne on Feb 2, 2008 7:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are plenty of rural areas even on the East coast and they're not much different from the West. As a matter of fact, travel 40 miles east, west, north, south of Washington DC and rural America will be right in front of your eyes. The elites in Washington and NYC are far too divorced from reality to get it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rural vs urban divide
Posted by: ReallyBearish on Feb 4, 2008 10:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No question that the issue here is rural vs. urban voters and philosophy. The problem is that rural voter have had and still have way too much power given the number of votes and percentage of the economy that they control.

Rural voters tend to be less informed than urban voters and tend to be way too "conservative" in the sense that they cling to outmoted ideas longer than urban voters. Thus, they were isolationists when internationalism was needed and militarists when we should have been cutting back on the military. They vote "big government" and "socialism" for themselves and "free markets" for everyone else. It'll be a long time coming before many of them discover "peak oil" and what that means to their choice of transportation and jobs. They will come around well after urban voters got the clue.

Ths divide is only going to get worse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]