There’s nothing wrong with being smart. In politics, it’s strategize or die. But at some point you must have principles or you’ll end up like…well…Arlen Specter.
Some think Brownback crossed the line with his recent vote for pro-abortion lunatic Kathleen Sebelius. Others think the pro-life criticism is just another example of the pro-life community eating its own.
The question being asked (I think rightly) is why would a Catholic Senator who calls himself “pro-life” vote for Sebelius for HHS Secretary.
Many people, including Steve Skojec writing at Inside Catholic, are comparing it to Sen. Rick Santorum’s endorsement of Specter over Toomey, which enraged many pro-lifers.
Brownback has lots of ready excuses for his actions, none of which hold much water. His vote for Sebelius – far more problematic than Santorum’s endorsement of Specter – comes in direct contrast to the 32 members of the House who wrote to the President and asked him to withdraw her nomination “in light of her close collaboration with the abortion industry.”
These political machinations wind up like this every time. When are we going to stop taking the bait? When are we going to stop going to bat for “pro-life” politicos who wind up selling their inheritance for poisoned pottage?
When I read this I sadly nodded my head. But this one surprised me. I looked into it further and there are some circumstances here that should be in evidence before Brownback gets thrown off the wagon.
One conservative Kansas blogger at Kaw and Border thinks Brownback may have made the right decision because it gets Sebelius out of Kansas. And let’s face it, whoever Obama picks to head up HHS is going to be completely lockstep with the pro-choice community. He says:
It is for those very reasons that a yes vote was also justfiable — particularly when all the other political AND policy factors are taken into consideration — such as the fact it gets Sebelius out of Kansas, for one; and two, it ensure that the winner of the Tiahrt/Moran Senate primary will be facing a much weaker Democrat than the substantial and real political force that is Kathleen Sebelius.
Now, some may be aghast at such a statement — “you’re putting politics before principle!!” There is another argument, however. First of all — there are actual principled policy reasons for removing Sebelius from the Governorship; and second of all, the fact is what we’re talking about here IS politics — there is no getting around it. Most dedicated principled conservatives compete in politics not for the political game but for the end results of such victories. However, in order to get there — you have to win. In the famous words of former Chiefs Coach Herman Edwards, “You Play to Win the Game.”
Now, does that mean you throw aside all principles for the sake of political victory? Of course note. Any effective principled politician must weigh both sides of those two words — both the “principled” and the “politician”.
Now I do think that strategy must play a role. But I do get a little tired of Republicans tossing their hands in the air over “conscience voters.”
Here’s the thing, pro-lifers have been burned sooooooooo many times that they’re fed up. How many times have Republican Presidents nominated “moderate” judges when it was the pro-life community that knocked on the doors and donated much of the money to get the President elected in the first place.
The vote for Sebelius wasn’t a close one and Brownback could’ve easily just voted against her as it was a 65-31 vote. So that leads me to believe that a deal was cut that Brownback had to vote for Sebelius thus keeping the opposition against Sebelius somewhat muted and in turn he got Sebelius out of Kansas for a few years.
Republicans in Kansas are thrilled to get ride of Sebelius. One Kansas City Star columnist said:
How do you spell “relief” in Topeka?
No more K-A-T-H-L-E-E-N.
What was striking about a visit to the Capitol last week was just how relieved — to use a form of that word again — many lawmakers were to have Gov. Kathleen Sebelius in Washington.
Yes, these lawmakers are Republicans…
So in the end, it comes down to the question of does the ends sometimes justify the means. If Kansas gets a pro-life Conservative governor, would that redeem Brownback’s Sebelius vote? It’s quite possible that Brownback himself may be eyeing a gubernatorial run.
And we all know that no matter what you think of Brownback’s vote, having a Governor Brownback would likely be a great help to pro-lifers.
But here’s the problem? Imagine that Brownback’s the Governor and he sees a possible avenue to the Presidency if he only moderates a little bit on the life issue. Now, many pro-lifers won’t completely trust that Brownback won’t give a little to get a little. That’s the problem with making deals.
May 4, 2009 at 4:27 am
Christopher Michael, if that’s really what you think should be done, why are you sitting in front of a computer right now instead of in a jail cell for carrying it out? I’m not saying that I agree or disagree with you, but I have to admit it’s hard to respect a position that’s a call for action held by someone who obviously is not acting.
May 4, 2009 at 5:17 am
Anonymous,
Christopher Michael, if that’s really what you think should be done, why are you sitting in front of a computer right now instead of in a jail cell for carrying it out? I’m not saying that I agree or disagree with you, but I have to admit it’s hard to respect a position that’s a call for action held by someone who obviously is not acting.Well, it’s also hard to respect a position from somebody who posts as “anonymous.” But ignoring that for a moment, I’ll clarify. I made a call for collective action by all Catholics, not for individual action. Individual action is easily ignored and dismissed, but that is impossible with large collective action. Show me a hundred courgeous Catholic men willing to join me and I’ll gladly barricade the nearest Planned Parenthood and just as gladly be arrested if need be. But it can’t be a solo act; it has to be large groups who not only have to ability to pull such an act of civil disobedience off, but who can also gain the attention that is necessary for such a thing to be effective in making a political and cultural impact.
Also, I only called for fighting cops if they fight you first. That’s likely to be the case if you are barricading an abortion clinic. You can’t start the fight; they have to.
~cmpt
May 4, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Will you all cease this childishness at once? You have each stated your views and your disagreement with each other; having been part in such disagreeements here and other places before, I hope for once I have learned how fruitless it is, and how it sours what could otherwise be a good discussion.
So, back to the actual topic at hand:
Sometimes good people do bad things. But they don’t get better by the rest of us sinners giving up on them. I’ve watched Sam Brownback in interviews, I’ve read about him on CMR including information implying he had been working with McCain to convince him to be completely pro-life. I believe he does sincerely care about the sanctity of life, and that he screwed up, perhaps very badly, in supporting this bulwark of butchers, Kathleen Sebelius.
But as we all continually sin, and God continually forgives us and reminds us of who we ought to be, fully as He made us, I don’t think anything good comes from excoriating the man. Rather, we must compel him to being better by trusting that he can in fact do better, as Christ knew that Peter’s denials were not all there was to him.
In short, I still support Brownback, not because of his vote on this matter, but because I know enough of him otherwise to trust that he does care about the unborn, even if he does not perfectly protect them.
May 5, 2009 at 4:10 pm
For Brownback to vote for Kathleen Sebelius as head of HHS most certainly has an important effect that cannot be brushed asside by the “Obama’s going to put an abortion advocate in there anyway” argument: Brownback is a Catholic. Yet his vote works hand-in-glove to demean and marginalize Catholic moral taching by helping Obama to put in place a “Catholic” abortion advocate. The more national positions Obama can fill with big-name “Catholics” who are willing to publically defy Catholic moral teaching, the better, if your goal is to marginalize Catholics.
Kate
May 5, 2009 at 7:23 pm
Hey, Kaw & Border here.
First of all, you have a great website. Though I disagree with your take on the Brownback issue in this case, I love your website overall and have found myself browsing here from time to time.
I will say that I completely understand those who wish Brownback would have opposed Sebelius. It was certainly justfiable and this point was made in the blog post at Kaw & Border.
However, I just simply take a different stance. Beyond the political considerations (which I think we shouldn't minimize considering it is indeed political victory that puts in a position for victories on substance, our ultimate goal), I do think there were principled reasons for getting rid of Sebelius.
To me, it was no different than if the vote had been to impeach her, fully knowing that she would be appointed by Obama anyway. Brownbzck essentially impeached her with his vote as Governor of Kansas. Brownback — and no other Republican — had the power to prevent Obama from picking a pro-abortion HHS Secretary or even a pro-abort Catholic HHS Secretary.
Finally, I think one commenter's thoughts that state government amounts to nothing more than filling potholes is far from the truth. Sebelius wouldn't have her reputation if the state government didn't have a profound impact on our lives.
Whether you're talking about taxes, government spending, abortion clinics, education curriculum, or size-of-government related issues, state government has as much of a role as the feds in many areas.
Point of all this is to say while a no vote on KS would have been totally acceptable, I cringe when I see folks saying Sam cast his principles away in his vote. He may have made a different conclusion than you did, but I see nothing in his decision that tells me Sam Brownback has no principles.