Making the Democratic Party Safe for Fathers

March 9, 2004

Call me Ishmael. Call me, as would some of the socially liberal Isaac's of the Democratic Party, "Republican-Lite" on social issues. I am a socially conservative, moderate Democrat, forgotten by the Democratic Party's elite. I spent this past Tuesday evening in Weymouth shaking hands with the governor and celebrating Republican State Representative Scott Brown's elevation to State Senator. What happened to Democrat Angus McQuilken, the handpicked successor of Cheryl Jacques (who held the seat for the past twelve years), who could not win an election scheduled to take place during the Democratic primary, thus giving him an unfair advantage?

Prior to the election, McQuilken declined an invitation to appear before Fathers and Families, an organization dedicated to preserving the father/child relationship after divorce, when nearly every other Democratic primary contestant decided to participate. After McQuilken won the Democratic primary, he declined yet again to speak before Fathers and Families, while his Republican opponent did. The mistake proved fatal. The media covered both events, and word spread. While seeking equal rights for gays by endorsing gay marriages, McQuilken did not have similar sentiments regarding equal rights for fathers. It is almost preposterous to believe that his failure to support fathers' rights did not cost him the election. McQuilken lost by 350 votes out of over 30,000 votes cast-or a mere 175 voters concerned about fatherhood who might have voted for McQuilken but were offended enough to vote for Brown. All in all, there was a wellspring of support from fathers, holding signs, phone banking, or, as I did, being a pole watcher.

The lesson? First, you can support fathers and win elections. But it goes far deeper. Democrats are losing seats by being captive to the most radical social fringes instead of focusing on jobs, healthcare, and the economy. It is a theory that we Democrats as a party can get to 51% of the electorate by forming a coalition on a "rainbow" of issues by embracing a wide-range of leftist social issues. It never works. You must fight for the middle that votes, not by trying to court a leftist who usually does not, but just might, "if there were a real alternative." You cannot offend family-oriented Joe six-pack Catholic, soccer moms and NASCAR dads and win elections. F.D.R. resoundingly won four elections because he had a single unifying theme about jobs opportunity, providing for our seniors, and defeating fascism. McGovern lost nearly every state in the nation to Nixon because he ran on a hodge-podge of social issues that offended the American mainstream silent majority.

If John Kerry plays it smart, he will focus on job creation, the ballooning federal deficit, and a frightening lack of health care for so many Americans. Instead, he is backing civil unions for homosexuals. Most Americans oppose gay marriages, and contrary to statements made by the Eagle, so do most Massachusetts residents, as indicated by a recent Boston Globe poll. Those that care about affordable health-care and prescription coverage for seniors will pay heed. Precisely because gay marriages are a no-win situation, the Berkshire Fatherhood Coalition remains neutral on the issue.

I remember vividly being actively involved with Shannon O'Brien's bid for the governorship in 2002, as did many others who were involved in the father's rights movement. We worked in fervent optimism when for months she was way ahead in the polls. Then she supported gay civil unions, and added that if it were politically viable, she would support gay marriages to boot. In the coup de grace, she supported 16 year olds getting abortions without parental consent or notification. As we all know, the O'Brien campaign grasped defeat from the jaws of victory. Unlike their socially liberal counterparts that simply go home when they don't like what's on the menu, social conservatives still enter the restaurant but vote for the other party, amounting to a loss of two votes, not one. Offending 2% of them on Election Day results in net loss of 4% of the vote. It's not good to offend Joe six-pack Catholic.

Which brings me to the District Attorney's race for Berkshire County. I believe we need a District Attorney in the vain of Rudolph Giuliani that wants to clean up the putrefying drug, infested mess that has become Berkshire County. We need to take away the welcome mat that has been placed before criminals from New York City and elsewhere, looking for easier pickins', that want to sell drugs to our children and have caused the explosion of drug addiction and violence in Berkshire County over the last twenty years. We need a District Attorney that is concerned by an out of control murder rate in the city of Pittsfield. We need a District Attorney that wants to take back our streets and is not obsessed with what he or she perceives to be the latest social fad. We need a tough, socially conservative prosecutor and a new direction in fighting crime. That's why I am tinkering with throwing my hat into the race. Joe Lieberman is right. Democrats cannot be the party that thwarts conservative social values and expects to win elections. Just ask Scott Brown or Angus McQuilken.

Rinaldo Del Gallo, III, Esq.