Open Letter to Senator John McCain (please stay that way)   

By Timothy A. Kelly

THERE IS A LOT OF DISCUSSION AMONG MEDIA PUNDITS AND BLOGGERS ALIKE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT YOU are a real maverick and, if so, whether you would stay that way if elected president. Much of your popularity among centrist-leaning Republicans and Democrats, as well as Independents, comes from the perception that you are nobody's lackey--that you follow your principles even in the face of unrelenting pressure to do otherwise. Since presidential elections are won not by the Right or the Left but by the majority in the middle, the answer to these two questions may determine whether or not you become America's 44th president. Permit me then, as one who admires mavericks, to explore them both.

Americans love mavericks, and many years ago we even had a hit TV show with that title (though hopefully you do not gamble). According to Webster's Dictionary, a maverick is "an independent individual who refuses to conform with his or her group." In light of the special interests and party bosses that seem to rule Washington, many of us long for a president who really would be his or her own person. We long for someone who will govern well on our behalf, based on strong principles that do not yield even in the face of the firestorm of political pressures inside the beltway. Are you such a person?

Are You A Maverick?

LET US CONSIDER THE EVIDENCE. FIRST THE QUESTION OF WHETHER or not you really are a maverick.

You did what most of us could never do. You faced down your captors in North Vietnam, refused early release, endured torture, and came home on your terms. As a Republican senator from Arizona for twenty-one years, you have earned the respect of many (and roused the ire of others) by crossing the aisle to work with Democrats such as Senators Kennedy and Feingold. You have been loyal to the current president yet do not hesitate to take a stand against administration policies when you deem it necessary. For instance, you were an early critic of the way the Iraq war was being fought and stood by your call for a "surge" even when that became extremely unpopular.

I can personally attest to your ability to stand up to a powerful special interest in Washington--the gambling industry. You may not remember, but as Executive Director of the National Gambling Impact Study Commission, I testified before your Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation on March 29, 2000. You were concerned about the corrupting impact on college athletes and coaches of Nevada's amateur sports gambling, which had been well documented by the Commission's report. Nevada's Senator Reid was on your Committee, intent on protecting his state's interests, and several leaders of the gambling industry were there to counter my testimony. I will never forget how relieved I was to find that you were capable of taking them all on, making sure that I was able to deliver my message to your Committee despite their efforts to shut me down. I know this was not easy for you, as both parties are beholden to huge campaign contributions from the gambling industry. Yet you held firm.

The conclusion we can draw on the first question, then, is that the evidence shows you are indeed the real thing. Deep down you really are a maverick--it's not just a political ploy of some sort--and you appear to take great pleasure in going your own way over the objections of special interests and party bosses alike.

Will You Stay That Way?

NOW TO THE SECOND QUESTION. IF ELECTED PRESIDENT, WOULD YOU OR WOULD YOU NOT STAND UP TO THE TORRENT of national and international political pressures that would be your daily world? Would you find yourself, despite your best efforts, yielding to the powers that rule within the Washington beltway? Would the maverick become tamed by the parties and their respective special interests? Would you be captured by the Right or perhaps swallowed by the Left?

Once again, let's examine the evidence. There are many issues that could be explored--for example, your opposition and then support for extending current tax cuts, or your opposition and then support for drilling for off-shore oil. But I would like to focus on the hot-button issue that almost sank your campaign--immigration reform.

Your campaign had a near-death experience when you collaborated with Senator Kennedy and others on a centrist-oriented immigration reform bill. The GOP leadership reacted against what they perceived as amnesty, and called for any reform to begin by securing the borders. Polls showed that Republican support for your candidacy was waning, and many pundits concluded that your days in the race were limited. The bill did not pass, your candidacy miraculously recovered, and now you must explain to Hispanic voters and the GOP leadership alike what your position is on immigration reform. As I understand it, you still support the bill's basic policies, but with one exception--you now say it is necessary to first secure the borders.

I can't help but wonder why you changed your position on that point. Was it because of new evidence?

Regarding the other issues mentioned--tax cuts and off-shore drilling--I think it is clear that new information has indeed changed lots of minds. There are many who now agree that the tax cuts "worked" to improve the economy, and, in light of rising oil prices, that responsible off-shore drilling should be considered--together with conservation. I applaud you for being flexible and wise enough as a leader to change your position on these two issues, based on new developments. (There are some leaders who seem to confuse being "principled" with being rigid, stubborn and out of touch. That is not what I am calling for!)

So what was the new evidence behind your changed position on border security? I can't help but worry that this shift has more to do with another dynamic altogether--the need to appease your party's base. If so, and if you have embraced something that inwardly you disagree with, therein lies the problem. This means you are tolerating discrepancy between your own core principles and your actions, while denying it is so. That may work politically in the short run, but it won't work psychologically in the long run. It will eventually sap you of the moral certainty and courage that is so admirable about you. Please don't let that happen!

What America desperately needs is a president whose principles enable him or her to stand firm in the face of unrelenting pressure--not stubbornly but wisely--someone who will do what is best for the people despite fierce contrary pressures. You have demonstrated your ability to do this. But you are also facing the inevitable slippery slope that we call national politics, where compromise after compromise appears to be necessary in order to move ahead. Some compromises are unavoidable, since politics is indeed the art of the possible, but they should be exceptional. A straight-talker should make it clear when that is what is happening, not pretend that you have been convinced. It's one thing to say "I can see that the only way to move ahead with immigration reform is to first secure the border, since that is a priority for the vast majority of citizens." It is quite another thing to say that you have changed your mind on the topic, if in fact you have not.

Nine Principles to Stand By

LET ME BE ONE VOICE THAT ENCOURAGES YOU NOT TO CONCEDE TO THE SLIPPERY SLOPE. LET ME ENCOURAGE YOU TO stand firm as a "principled centrist"--governing wisely from the center based on a clear set of principles, feeling free to draw on the best ideas from the Right and from the Left. I believe this is not just "where you are" but "who you are"--that you are a centrist by temperament, and a principled man. I believe your principles are well founded, and that they flow from your deepest beliefs, values and faith. You have spoken often and movingly about the three principles that have carried you this far: duty, honor, and country. Your web site adds three more: reform, prosperity, and peace. Furthermore, based on your speeches and position papers, I believe we could add another three: equal opportunity, ecological responsibility, and health and welfare for the people.

These nine principles (and perhaps others) reflect your heart and soul, do they not? They capture what you live for, what you see as worth fighting for, even perhaps what you would die for. It is the internal principles that make sense of the external actions and policies of a maverick. Please do not let the merciless pressures of the political process rob you of that which is most important. Please find ways to articulate, hold, and advance your principles even amidst the cynicism of beltway politics, and even in the midst of negotiations and compromises. Please continue to enjoy resisting the special interests and party bosses who think that Washington is theirs. Please do not pander either to the far Right or to the far Left, for both are far wrong.

My hope is that your principled centrism will win out and that, if elected, you will surprise the cynics and pundits who suggest you are just another beltway politician. If that happens, you can help lead the nation back from the senseless and destructive polarization that now plagues us. Enough of the "red" and "blue" states, enough of the hate speech from the far Left and the far Right. Show us a way down the middle, the via media, for we are all Americans. Please show us how a maverick can govern well based on principled centrism--with straight talk, with wisdom, and in a manner that truly serves the needs of the people.

Dr. Tim Kelly has served in senior government positions at both the state and federal levels. He is Director of the Depree Center Public Policy Institute, which promotes "principled centrism" (www.depree.org).