RALEIGH – Democratic and Republican partisans may bristle at the suggestion, but it occurs to me that House Speaker Jim Black and President George W. Bush face a similar predicament at the moment. Both have become the subject of bad-news cascades.
Other people prefer phrases such as “feeding frenzy” or “blood in the water” to describe the phenomenon, but I think these terms assume too much malevolence on the part of the reporters, producers, and pundits perpetuating it. What really happens, I submit, is that once an unflattering story or series of stories appears from a single source – be it a news organization, political competitor, or whistleblower – competitive pressures kick in. No one wants to be scooped repeatedly. Also, disclosures about powerful politicians accused of poor judgment or wrongdoing tend to prompt folks to reassess information they already had about allegations that previously seemed shaky or inconsequential.
It’s obvious that Bush was trapped in one of these bad-news cascades many weeks ago. Communications and managerial missteps by the president and top aides during the Katrina disaster raised questions of competence and cronyism. The Valerie Plame investigation took an ominous turn. The Harriet Miers nomination raised conservative hackles about a lack of seriousness in the administration while also bringing back the cronyism charge.
Allegations and public-relations hits have also been piling up at the office of Speaker Black. Already under investigation as part of a larger probe of campaign-finance practices during the 2004 cycle, he and close aide Meredith Norris then became embroiled in controversy about the lobbying efforts behind a state-run lottery, and more broadly about the nature of their political relationship.
Let me hasten to say that I’m not equating the Bush and Black cascades on substance, on the truth of the allegations and on their significance if they prove to be true. I’m only observing that once unflattering stories start to pile up, one on top of the other, the effect can seem overwhelming. The natural, and wrong, reaction is to hunker down, treat press and public inquiries as threats, and try to bluff or bully one’s way through. More often than not, such a response just makes the cascade expand. It makes the subject look guilty, and that encourages the opportunistic to look for more disclosures to trumpet.
If there is an expulatory explanation or justification to offer, it’s better to do so clearly and confidently. If mistakes were indeed made, it’s better to fess up and count on the public’s understanding of human frailty. And if the behavior in question shades over from mistakes to potential legal violations, immediate public statements may be unwise but obvious, clumsy attempts to avoid reporters or blame the media or political enemies are even worse.
The coming weeks promise major news in both the Bush and Black cascades. If the special prosecutor indicts White House aides in the Plame matter, that will make the news coverage up to now look tame by comparison. And if the State Board of Elections releases a damning report on the behavior of Black contributors, that will kick his trouble up a notch.
Their champions can only hope that events will take a different turn.
Hood is president of the John Locke Foundation.