Gary Wilson
Is it true that support for Great Lakes issues transcends partisan politics? Do other regions of the country see the Great Lakes as a “national treasure?” We’re the “Rust Belt,” right?
I dove into mythology a few weeks ago with my “Sisyphean Problem” commentary and it evoked strong responses. Who knew that anyone paid attention to mythology anymore?
As I wrote that column the country was marking the 50th anniversary of President John F. Kennedy’s assassination. The media was full of reflections about JFK. One that caught my eye was about myths about the man and his politics — things we perceive to be true but aren’t. They are repeated to the point that they become accepted as fact.
The one myth that stands out is that Kennedy was a big-spending liberal. He was certainly more liberal than not, but he was a fiscal conservative, according to a Washington Post commentary. His financial policies later guided President Reagan — a true and acknowledged fiscal conservative.
That caused me to question if there are Great Lakes premises repeated so often that we accept them as true without a basis.
I say yes.
Myth #1 — Support for the Great Lakes is the one area where Republicans and Democrats agree.
Not really.
It’s true at the national level that our politicians all talk about supporting the Great Lakes, but that isn’t necessarily the case.
Here’s what I mean.
In April of this year the 2014 budget process was in full swing. That’s when members of Congress lobby the leadership for their pet projects. Great Lakes state members — 38 or them — wrote to the House leadership requesting that funding for the Great Lakes be kept at $300 million. That’s the most recent baseline level after initial cuts from $475 million.
This type of letter is circulated by members of Congress all the time.
And it sounds impressive, right? Great Lakes representatives in a rare bipartisan move stand up for the Great Lakes.
But a closer look is revealing.
There are 118 members of the House of Representatives — 61 Republicans and 57 Democrats — from the Great Lakes states. Only 38 signed the letter and only six were Republicans.
Do the math.
Only 32 percent of our representatives were onboard with the request and only 10 percent of Great Lakes state Republicans signed it. That’s not resounding support and it clearly doesn’t meet the standard for bipartisanship.
Even more revealing is who didn’t sign the letter.
Conspicuous by his absence is Rep. Paul Ryan from Wisconsin, the former VP candidate. Ryan has Lake Michigan lakefront in his district and is one of the most powerful and influential members of the House. Yet he stayed on the sidelines this year when drastic cuts for the Great Lakes were proposed, allowing party politics to trump Great Lakes support.
A similar exercise took place in the Senate where only one of five Republican Great Lakes senators supported the funding while the request was signed by all 11 Democrats.
And it gets worse when you bore down to the state level. Issues like mining in Wisconsin near Lake Superior and water conservation in Ohio that impact the Great Lakes typically are decided along party lines.
Myth #2 – The Great Lakes are seen as a “national treasure.”
National treasure has been so oft-repeated in reference to the Great Lakes that it has lost its impact. And it’s not only the Great Lakes.
The term is regularly used by the Chesapeake Bay community as well as by San Francisco Bay and Puget Sound advocates.
Are the Great Lakes a national treasure in San Francisco? Or the Puget Sound? I doubt it. I don’t think regular folks in the Starbucks queue in Seattle think much about the Great Lakes. If they do, it’s the negative aspects of Detroit, Cleveland and Buffalo and certainly not in “national treasure” terminology.
And in fairness, what are your honest thoughts about the Puget Sound? Do you see it as a national treasure? You probably don’t. It’s more likely a candidate for one of those Jay Leno street interview questions about geography.
Myth #3 — The Great Lakes region is the “Rust Belt.”
That’s how the country has seen us for decades. Persistent images of brown water and brownfields are hard to dispel. But continued reference to the region as the “Rust Belt” ignores the progress we’re making to clean our waterways, nascent as it may be. Mayor Tom Barrett in Milwaukee refers to the region as the “Fresh Coast” and we’re not there yet. But we’ve moved past the “Rust Belt.”
Ok, I’ve had a little fun here with mythology, branding phrases like “national treasure” and our natural resources.
Protecting the Great Lakes, Chesapeake Bay, San Francisco Bay and the Puget Sound is serious business. We’re not selling soap. Ultimately the perception of these waterways will be determined by our deeds, not slogans.
Are the Great Lakes a national treasure? They should be, but repeating the label often doesn’t make it so. Does support for the Great Lakes transcend political differences? No. The math cuts past the rhetoric.
Let’s strive to be honest in our dialogue.
Sloganeering and hyping bi-partisanship that doesn’t exist sets expectations that can’t be met.
That’s myth-making, not making progress.