RALEIGH – Joe Sinsheimer, the longtime Democratic political operative who is calling for House Speaker Jim Black to resign his office, says he is doing his party a favor. He is probably right – though no Democratic leaders have, as yet, admitted this.
The bad news for Black just keeps coming. Sinsheimer’s new website, JimBlackMustGo.com, helped to break some of the news with the revelation that the speaker made a political contribution to Michael Decker, a former Republican House member who had previously switched parties to keep Black in power. Decker, out of office after losing a party primary, apparently pocketed the money. Another disclosure last week came from a bundle of emails showing that Black had helped to create a state job for the wife of a political contributor – much as he had previously helped created a state job for Decker.
Sinsheimer is clearly outraged, as are many North Carolinians, by the arrogance and abuse of power inherent in Black’s political behavior. But he also makes the explicitly partisan argument that Democrats should push Black out of his post as soon as possible to limit the damage to the party’s prospects in the 2006 election cycle. While at least one major newspaper’s editorial page seems to agree with him, no prominent Democrats have publicly endorsed this argument.
When political partisan gets into situations where they become known for criticizing a key leader of their own party, there is always a risk of Jeffordsization (as in Jim) – also sometimes known as Miller Time (as in Zell). This means becoming either the Democrat most popular among Republicans or the Republican most popular among Democrats. Among a certain set, the obvious personal benefits derived from Jeffordsization or Miller Time are too alluring to resist: media attention, adoration, self-importance.
It’s important to stress here that Sinsheimer is not the Jeffords or Miller of the Black case. He clearly remains a partisan Democrat, one with whom most partisan Republicans will likely share few political positions. He’s not gunning for Black because the latter is too liberal, or too conservative. He’s arguing that Black is unsuited to lead and that if Democrats don’t do something about it, the voters will do it for them.
Sinsheimer is correct, it seems to me. Republicans would be better off with Jim Black firmly ensconced in the office of speaker through November of next year. It would give them a ready target and means of presenting a unifying message that savages sleaze and promises reform. Yes, Black is a prodigious fundraiser for legislative candidates, but it is likely that most of that campaign cash will continue to flow to Democrats as long as the donors believe the Democratic Party will retain power in Raleigh. It isn’t that Black is fiendishly clever and impossible to say no to.
Or, well, maybe I should put that another way: Black is replaceable. Whatever assets he continues to bring to the table are now, or soon will be, offset by the weighty liability of the bad-news cascade. As long as he remains, he’ll be the story of the election – and that is a recipe for Republican success, not Democratic success.
“I know I’m in the minority on this at this point,” Sinsheimer told CJ last week. “There are a lot of people who don’t want to step out and take a leadership position, and I think it’s unfortunate.”
You know who doesn’t consider that unfortunate? The GOP.
Hood is president of the John Locke Foundation.