No Way

by digby

If there's one mealy mouthed "centrist" bucket of lukewarm spit operation in Washington that makes me crazy (and there are many to choose from) I would have to say that Third Way is the one. They fetishize bipartisanship, compromise and difference splitting to the point where there is no there there and the conservatives win simply because they have a pulse.

Yesterday McJoan at DKos published a Third Way memo which predictably comes out against the public plan option in health care reform ---which indicates to me that it is probably considered by most buckets of lukewarm spit to be the bargaining chip in the debate . (And what do you know? It turns out that Third Way's memo was written by health industry flacks.)

Adam Green immediately launched a Defund Third Way initiative, which I heartily endorse, and not just because of the health care memo, which is bad enough. But I do take some issue with his characterization of TW as a useful group on progressive messaging on social issues. In my view, there is no more pernicious inside group on women's rights than Third Way and their partners in the "common ground" campaign.

The Come Let Us Reason Together Governing Agenda is a common ground agenda that charts a new way forward by uniting key Evangelical and progressive leaders behind specific policy recommendations on some of the most divisive culture issues of our times: abortion, gay rights, torture, and immigration reform.

Now on torture and immigration reform, they are uncontroversial from a liberal point of view. They do say that "henceforth" people will be held accoujntable for torture, but it's hard to fault them for it since the president and the congress say the same thing.

On gay rights they ignore marriage, do little song and dance about employer discrimination and then throw this on the table: "We affirm that no legislation to protect the human dignity and rights of gay and lesbian people should threaten the religious liberty of churches and other religious organizations." I'm sure that will make all religious conservatives back down on gay really rights.

In fact, if I were a true cynic I'd believe that they threw in torture and immigration as a smokescreen for their true "common ground" agenda which is all about abortion rights.

Here's just a small example of the con game they are running:

IV. Avoiding Abortion Message Traps—Seeing Through the Mirage

On the surface, the message of reducing unintended pregnancies and increasing access to contraception is popular and strong. But as an abortion message, as our pollster Diane Feldman noted, “it risks people feeling like you are unwilling to articulate your position and they can conclude it is an effort to hide it.”

Once people hear that the speaker favors abortion rights, the support narrows. In addition, Democrats and Republicans each need to be aware that Americans have predisposed views that color their perceptions. They see Democrats as overly permissive about sex and tone deaf on abortion morality; they see Republicans as moral but rigid and extreme. An individual position that is unclear opens elected officials and candidates to the perception that their individual position is indistinct from the perceptions that accrue to their party.

Trap #1: Contraception is Not a Response on Abortion

We agree that contraception is a critical component to family planning, reducing unintended pregnancies and reducing abortions, but it is not an answer to the abortion question and it has its own moral complexities. Americans support increasing access to contraception, but they are keenly aware of the downside. For example, …

• 61% say we should provide contraception to sexually active teenagers, but
68% also say that reducing sexual activity among teenagers should be a
public policy goal.

• 51% worry that “easier access to contraception will increase teenage sexual
activity and promiscuity.”

• 30% are very uncomfortable with providing contraception to teenagers
without the knowledge of their parents, 34% are uncomfortable but think
it’s a necessity, and only 33% are fully comfortable with it.

• Only 25% believe that providing contraception to low-income women and
teenagers will have a large impact on reducing unintended pregnancies and
abortion (35% medium impact, 24% small impact, and 11% no impact).

• Americans are about evenly split on whether the morning after pill is “a
good thing because it will reduce unintended pregnancies and abortions,”
or “a bad thing because it will lead to more irresponsible and promiscuous
sexual activity.”

• And Americans are just as supportive of abstinence education as
contraception access with 60% saying abstinence education is “a worthy
goal,” compared to the 34% who say it is “a waste of time and resources.”

This is not to warn progressives off of contraception, but rather to be aware that Americans see both sides of the coin and that an abortion message based on contraception has real limitations and dangers unless it is linked to a larger message and vision.

Trap #2: …And Neither is Reducing Unintended Pregnancies

Simply put, Americans wholeheartedly support the goal of reducing unintended pregnancies, but they know when this is an attempt to duck the abortion question. Our recommendation is that rather than being the message, reducing unintended pregnancies must serve the message of reducing the need for abortions in America. For example, . .
.
• While 82% support elected leaders who say “we must reduce unintended
pregnancies in America,” 57% say that it does not clearly answer where a
politician stands on abortion.

• And 60% say “it is important to reduce both the number of unintended
pregnancies and the number of abortions,” compared to 23% who
responded “it is more important to reduce the number of unintended
pregnancies than the number of abortions.

Trap #3: The Party Preconception Lens


For Democrats, in particular, an abortion message that is based on contraception and reducing unintended pregnancies plays into negative perceptions that Americans hold about them regarding sexual ethics.

They insist that the public favors a position that recognizes the "moral complexity" but when you unpack all their cherry picked data, what you see is a program that capitulates to the public's misconceptions (if the data is even true) rather than even attempt to educate the public about the principles involved. The "larger vision" they support is one which abstinence education and "abortion reduction" are emphasized, while we soft pedal birth control and a woman's right to choose. because, after all, the big "problem" is that Americans allegedly believe that Democrats don't believe sex is shameful.

That is the great insight Third Way brings to progressive rhetoric and issue positioning --- half baked social conservatism dressed up in a concern troll burka and a chastity belt.

s

Click here for the numbers to politely call and ask them not to lobby against the public plan option or use Harry and Louise ( seriously --- &^%^&$$!!) in their literature to undermine the reform message. Oy.


*And if they give you any trouble, you could also politely ask them why,when they care so much about abstinence and sexual morality, they are performing like two dollar whores for the health insurance industry.

Update: Here's more on why Third Way is the wrong way. The conclusion reads:

The question for progressives is not whether we want to influence the Democrats -- of course we do. The question is do we want to invest precious time and resources on inside-the-Beltway cautiousness, bad policy analysis that makes no waves, takes no chances and doesn't differentiate itself from the conservatives, or do we work to build something more real, vital, honest and progressive -- based on better policy -- ideas that change America because they change the terms of debate, not simply pander ineffectively to a mythological, out-dated concept of the "center." If we don't, if we think that type of ideological myopia is counterproductive, we better keep watch on Third Way.


.