Could Mark Hatfield start in Oregon politics today?

Chris Lowe

Reading the long story on Mark Hatfield's public life in The Oregonian by Jeff Mapes today gave rise to the thought that Hatfield would find it difficult if not impossible to launch a political career in Oregon today with the political and policy views and practices that defined his actions.

To see that, it is important to note one fact not mentioned anywhere by Mapes: Hatfield was a staunch opponent of abortion and abortion rights.

Thus on the one hand it would be hard for Hatfield to find a place in today's narrowed Republican Party, at least as a candidate. He would be derided as a "Republican In Name Only" for his strong anti-militarist views and his willingness to support public investment in economic development and to aid people in poverty. Mapes says his slogan as governor was "parks and payrolls," which clearly for him included public payrolls as well a private sector development. But his views on abortion probably would prevent him from advancing within the Democratic Party either.

Mapes portrays both Hatfield's anti-militarism and his concerns for the poor as rooted in his religious faith as an evangelical Baptist, although his views about war were also informed by his experience as a World War II veteran who was also exposed to the aftermath of the atomic bomb in Hiroshima, Japan a few months after it was dropped. That same faith was the source of his views on abortion. It is interesting to note that such faith is in fact compatible with moderate and liberal views as well as conservative ones, which those involved in the peace movement perhaps see more often than people who focus on partisan politics these days.

A sidebar in the print edition of The Oregonian shows Hatfield's fellow Republican senator, Bob Packwood, and his successor Gordon Smith both praising him, along with the current sitting Democratic senators, Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley. Wyden and Merkley both characterize Hatfield as "bipartisan." While this is understandable in terms of today's ideological polarization (within a very narrow range globally) of the parties, in which Hatfield's views would not fit comfortably in either party, it also reflects the narrowing of political thinking in our day. Hatfield was a partisan. He endorsed Richard Nixon, even though he worked with George McGovern on anti-war resolutions.

There is a case to be made that it was the politics of abortion that polarized the parties in Oregon so that Hatfield today would have trouble finding a comfortable partisan home, though probably there are other ways to tell the story too.

When I was a college student at Reed in the years on either side of 1980, statewide political offices were dominated by more or less moderate Republicans whom today's conservative ideologues would see as RINOs. Bob Packwood in a way inverted Hatfield's commitments, being a key pro-choice leader in the Senate while supporting Ronald Reagan's military expansion, illustrating that "moderate" could mean many things, while Vic Atiyeh was governor and Norma Paulus was secretary of state. The rise of the Oregon Citizens' Alliance, which initially focused on anti-abortion politics before switching over to targeting lesbian and gay people, took place not only in the form of the OCA's signature initiative campaigns, but also provided the spearhead for the takeover of Republican internal politics by a new generation of sharp ideological conservatives. Meanwhile on the Democratic side what Hatfield would have seen as a "consistent life ethic" combining anti-militarism with anti=abortion views has likewise become difficult if not toxic for office seekers. (I say this as a strong advocate for abortion rights and women's control of their own bodies, and also as a strong anti-militarist, reflecting on the complexities of relating to Mark Hatfield over the years.)

It seems fitting to note that Saturday August 6 was the 66th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, and that tomorrow, August 9, is the anniversary of the atomic bombing of Nagasaki. I believe that Mark Hatfield would want us to remember him, the good he tried to do according to the lights of his moral and ethical ideas, and his legacy -- and that he also would want us to remember those who died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, to use the coincidence of his passing with anniversary of those events to rededicate ourselves to pursuing the peace and nuclear disarmament that were so important to him.

By Chris Lowe Aug. 08, 2011