Monday, January 25, 2010

Dunn: Don't 'Over-Interpret' Massachusetts

By Kirk Victor  

Anita Dunn

Former White House communications director

Was last week's Massachusetts Senate result a referendum on President Obama? Not according to Anita Dunn, who served as interim White House communications director for six months last year. Dunn told National Journal in an interview on Wednesday that Washington is drawing the wrong message from Republican Scott Brown's victory against Democrat Martha Coakley to fill the late Sen. Edward Kennedy's Senate seat. The election result was not a reflection on the president, Dunn said, but the product of a strong campaign by Brown and voter anger with Washington.

Dunn also discussed the way Democratic candidates should approach the midterms, the challenge of appealing to both base and independent voters, and the relationship between health care and the economy. Edited excerpts follow.

NJ: What did the White House learn from Scott Brown's victory?

Dunn: Here is the reality: You had Scott Brown running a very good campaign, basically saying, 'Everybody out there is very angry, everybody is frustrated, Washington is messed up and I get that.' And he won.

NJ: So is Washington over-interpreting the significance of it?

Dunn: First, I do believe that everybody is over-interpreting it. There is no question about that. Somebody said a Republican winning in Massachusetts is so unheard of. I said, 'I know; I never heard of [former Mass. Govs.] Bill Weld or Mitt Romney.' This guy is very much consistent with those guys.

What are the lessons for people in Washington? What are the lessons for Democrats? It's very clear. The first lesson for Democrats is you ran with wind at your back in 2006 and 2008 and you don't have the wind at your back in 2010, which means you can't take anything for granted. It does not matter what kind of state you are in. You should expect a competitive race, because this is a democracy and voters want to hear from you what you are going to do to address their concerns. You need to be prepared to go out there and aggressively contest what your opponents will do. You need to draw a contrast the way they will draw a contrast. You need to run a vigorous, energetic, aggressive campaign because it is not going to be a walk in the park this year.

But that happens in politics. You have good years and you have bad years. If you are here for a reason and you know what you want to do, you go out and explain to your constituents what you are doing and why you are doing it. And they are going to respond to it.

NJ: Well, nobody saw it coming even a month ago, and it is, after all, Massachusetts and Ted Kennedy's seat.

Dunn: Why didn't people see it coming? Because a month ago, [Coakley] had a large, comfortable lead and [Brown] was unknown. This is another point [that shows] campaigns matter. So everyone who says it is now January 20th and here is what the polls say and so this is what will happen in November are ignoring the fact that campaigns matter. A month ago, by her own pollster's memo, [Coakley] was ahead by 21 points. She lost by 5. What happened? There was a campaign. It didn't just magically happen with everything frozen in time. So the reality is campaigns matter.

NJ: So the election was not a referendum on the president?

Dunn: No. Scott Brown said it was not a referendum on the president.

NJ: So you agree with Mr. Brown on that?

Dunn: I am saying one would think he would have some credibility on this issue. As much as you guys want to make it a referendum on the president, he didn't run against the president. He didn't have the president in his ads, and he himself has said it was not a referendum on the president.

NJ: He did run against the president's health care plan. Does it have any impact on that?

Dunn: The health care plan is a proxy for people's anger with Washington. And they are feeling that it is not doing anything about the economy. It is that simple. You guys write this all the time: People don't know what's in the health care plan, but they don't like it. Explain that to me. Bottom line, what people should bring out of this is that we have had two change electorates, 2006 and 2008. We are looking at a third. And if you are not ready to communicate in a very meaningful and relevant way to the people you want to represent how you are part of the change that is going to improve their lives, you will lose. It is that simple.

NJ: On Capitol Hill, Democrats are nervous. Obviously the White House is dependent on those folks to advance the president's agenda. How do you see that relationship playing out?

Dunn: People on the Hill can look at Massachusetts and draw the conclusion that they can either be part of the change -- and they can go home and show people how what they are doing is improving the lives of their constituents -- or they can look like they either are not accomplishing very much or that they are part of an institutional Washington that is very unpopular with voters. People on the Hill will make their decisions about what they want to do next, but the president is going to continue to do what he has done since he took office, which is to work to make the lives of working families in this country better again. It's why he ran. It is what he has been doing.

NJ: Having run so many Senate campaigns, are you concerned that there is a tension between appealing to the base and to independents?

Dunn: I think that what people in this country want are elected officials who respond to their concerns, who are working on what affects them, who don't side with special interests against the working families of this country and who are going to start moving this country in the right direction again. That is not a left, right, center, progressive, [or] conservative issue. It is about getting the country moving, common-sense policies that actually affect people's lives. I don't buy into this artificial sort of independents-versus-base-versus-whatever. People want progress.

And the Democratic Party has put things in place; members of Congress have cast a series of very tough votes. It is a tough climate out there. There is a 10 percent unemployment rate, and the reality is that with a 10 percent unemployment rate people aren't going to be happy, and they shouldn't be happy. What Democrats need to do is show how what they are doing is laying the foundation for economic growth and job creation in the long term and how, in the short term, they are doing the things that are necessary to help people through this emergency.

NJ: The administration has repeatedly said that health care reform is tied to folks' economic welfare. Has that not broken through, since as you said, health care was a proxy for folks' anger?

Dunn: It is a proxy for it because it has become such a flashpoint. But the reality is that at the end of the day, whether you are worried about losing your job, whether you are in a job where your employer does not provide you with health care because they can't afford to or they don't want to, whether you feel like you have health care right up until the day that you need it, it is a pocketbook issue. It is why people in this country want insurance reform. It is why they want health reform -- anybody's polling will tell you -- because they understand that it is a pocketbook issue for them.