Endorsement

I hereby endorse Howard Dean for the Democratic nomination for President.

This may not surprise you. (Oh come on, at least pretend to be surprised.) But I thought I'd give my reasons.

1. Strategery
I'm not going to make an electability argument. Others have already done that better than I could (lame American Idol references aside). Anyway, my guess is that there are two candidates (though only two) who are probably more electable than Dean. But I honestly do believe that if our goal is to get decent policies for the next ten years, rather than to win the next election, Dean is the best choice.

The Democratic party has been playing defense in a game of G.O.P.Calvinball for the last 20+ years--really, for my entire life. Since 2000, we've played unbelievably inept defense. We all know the results.
When I hear DLC types make dire predictions about Dean leading the party off a cliff, or into the wilderness, I have to wonder what country they've been living in. It's certainly not the one where a Republican party (which is further right than it's been since the days of Harding and Coolidge, and seems to want to take us back to those days) controls all branches of the federal government and most state houses. There was a week sometime in 2003 when Democrats in the legislature fled the state of Texas and holed up at a Denny's near a Holiday Inn just across the state line--and this was the best political news I'd heard in a few weeks.

This needs to change, in the worst way. Howard Dean has a better chance than any other candidate of changing it. He's got the most money, the most numerous and most dedicated volunteers, the most innovative organizing strategy, the ability to take or throw a punch, the ability to inspire people who agree with him and to change the mind of those who don't. He's also run the best campaign.

(He's having a lousy week right now, admittedly. But that's less a reflection of Dean than of a month of furious attacks from seven primary opponents, the G.O.P., and a press corps ready, willing and able to publish every third rate piece of opposition research. It shouldn't obscure the extent to which Dean came out of nowhere, to lead the field and set the terms of debate.)

2. Good Presidenting
I can argue strategic voting with the best of them, but don't let me fool you. I'll be voting as much with my heart than my head next month.

It started with the war in Iraq. The week it started was pretty awful. I was convinced we were about to make a large and costly mistake, and there was a real possibility that this mistake would lead to the death of someone I cared about. (I knew this was a remote possibility, but at the time--with the orange alert, and the images of Baghdad on fire that were now all too familiar--it didn't feel remote.) But unlike a lot of people who opposed the war I knew that once we went in we had to stay; my biggest fear, apart from a chemical or terrorist attack, was that Bush would oust Saddam, leave the country in chaos or install a friendlier dictator, and leave to start the next war. None of the leaders of the country or the Democratic party would say anything about any of this. Dean--this obscure governor from a tiny state, who had absolutely no hope of winning the nomination--was the only exception. His statement on the day the war began was almost the only thing that made me hopeful. That's when I started volunteering for the campaign. I knew he had no chance in hell at the nomination; I didn't really care. I wanted to work for the candidate who I thought would be the best President.

That feels like a very long time ago, but I still think Dean would be the best President:

--I think he's right on most of the issues. He's the only candidate with anything resembling a responsible plan for reducing the deficit; he's also got a proven history of tightfistedness. I'm not a real deficit hawk, but right now that's exactly what we need. His health care plan is cheaper, better, and has a better chance of passing Congress than Gephardt's. There's the Iraq war, of course. His foreign policy positions are suprisingly well thought out for the governor of a tiny state, and surprisingly similar to mine (and to Clark's, oddly enough--has anyone noticed this but me?). He and Kerry have the best energy/environmental plans. He's as good as anyone on immigration. Card check for unions is a very good idea. He's too protectionist, and doesn't have a good enough education plan, but that's true of all the candidates.

--Any Democratic president will probably have to deal with an extremely hostile Republican Congress to get anything done domestically, and I think Dean has the best chance of doing this successfully.

--His record as governor really is impressive. Yeah, it was a tiny state, but there's no one else in the primaries with any civilian executive experience to speak of. Vermont was about the only state in the country not to run a large deficit or make big spending cuts last year. His health care program and his childcare program work. He was very much the pragmatist and the moderate, but he also showed real political courage. Twice in a row, the Vermont Supreme Court handed down an unexpected and unpopular decision the year before the election. Twice in a row Dean rose to the occasion--first on equal school funding for rich and poor districts in 1997-8; then on civil unions, which everyone knows about. A lot of people will tell you that the court forced Dean to act, but the fact is that courts have a hard time imposing a remedy on an uncooperative governor. I don't know how many school funding decisions have fallen apart in the remedy phase. Two states have passed constitutional amendments to avoid legalizing gay marriage, and Ruth Dwyer sure as hell wasn't planning on cooperating with the court. It would have been easier by far to deal with the wrath of the Vermont Supreme Court than the backlash, complete with death threats, that followed the civil unions bill.

--I know every outsider in the history of the U.S. talks about being free from the corruption of special interests. But Dean seems sincere about it in a way that most aren't. The way he has run his campaign has been genuinely good for democracy, and I am hopeful that this would continue with his administration.

By the way, if you're on the fence about Dean I strongly recommend poking around in this Vermont newspaper archive.

Comments

[von]

I am shocked, shocked, to find gambling in this establishment! Round up the usual suspects!

[Jesurgislac]

I agree with you, Katherine. But, as I've just told Kevin over at Calpundit, the important thing is for everyone who agrees Bush must go to get behind the winning candidate after the primaries. None of the options could be worse than Bush, after all. (Damning with faint praise, I know.)

[mark]

In the long run, no Democrat will be electable unless the party stands for something different that what the GOP stands for. This may hold for the 2004 election as well. Dean understands this point; Kerry and Clark do not.

[Nell Lancaster]

Your endorsement post is outstanding, Katherine. Now I'm fired up for an evening of Dean phoning!

[seth]

Well put, Katherine.