Dukakis and Jackson: Two Roads, One Destination : I Support a Ticket of Two White Males in Order to Reverse Reagan Damage

The Democratic National Convention in Atlanta this year is a stark contrast for me from San Francisco in 1984. During that election year my brother, Michael, and I both attended the convention and were elated when presidential candidate Walter F. Mondale picked Rep. Geraldine A. Ferraro (D-N.Y.) as his running mate. I remember how exuberant I was over the future of women and minorities. At the very least, I thought, it was a great relief not to have two middle-aged white men in the No. 1 and 2 slots on the Democratic ticket.

This year I support the middle-aged white male duo now heading up the Democratic ticket. As a supporter of Massachusetts Gov. Michael S. Dukakis, I am on the opposite side from my brother, Michael Lomax, an Atlanta elected official and a delegate for the Rev. Jesse Jackson.

Please don’t misunderstand the reasons for my position this year. I am not wild about Dukakis or his vice presidential choice, Texas Sen. Lloyd Bentsen. The team lacks a certain level of interest. Certainly we do not have the excitement of having a woman or a black on the ticket. Further, there is something smug and self-righteous about Dukakis. But I want to be realistic. I know and am convinced that my interests are better served by Dukakis and Bentsen than by Vice President George Bush and anyone whom he picks. I’m most interested in a ticket that can serve the long-term needs and interests of this country.

As a civil-rights lawyer I’m very aware of the political erosion that has taken place in the U.S. Justice Department over the past eight years. I’m concerned about the quality of life in America. Only a Democratic White House can relieve the psychological pressure generated by seeing the hordes of helpless homeless in our streets.

We have also poisoned our future by not providing training and job programs for the youth of our cities. They have created their own answers to the problems of poverty and unemployment by forming gangs and earning income selling drugs.

It’s going to take political savvy, support and clout to reverse the trend in these areas. Jackson does not have it.

I, a firm believer in reality and hardball politics, say that, despite the good he has done, Jackson is not a goal in and of himself. Jackson’s No. 1 priority was to bring into the fold those who had been disfranchised and not fairly considered. He has done that. His No. 2 goal was to liberalize the platform and make it responsible to the interests of women and minorities. Under the aegis of his Rainbow Coalition, he has done just that.

But the fact that Jackson is not on the ticket does not mean that Dukakis is racist, or that the ticket should not be supported. What it means is that this country, in 1988, is still not ready for a black man as President or, for that matter, as vice president. This is a commentary on the country, not on Jackson. It is also not a commentary on the Democratic Party.

The ultimate long-term interests of blacks, minorities and women has to be to make sure that the Democrats get back into office. After that return to power, I want to see them reverse the policies of the past eight years, which have undone so much good. This means that we cannot give a blanket endorsement to the Dukakis-Bentsen ticket. It means that they have to earn respect and support because we will not listen to generalities or vague promises. We want real-world commitment.

In terms of Jackson’s future during the remainder of the election year, I see him with several possibilities. He should be able to name a secretary or two--perhaps the secretary of health and human services or of transportation. He should be able to get Cabinet positions for others who represent his philosophy, if not be in the Cabinet himself. I think it is very important that we do not accept idle promises, but demand specific commitments in return for our support.

Actually, my brother and I are not too far apart. We both know that sending George Bush to the White House would mean a continuation of Reaganomics. From my perspective as a lawyer, that also means a continuation of hostility from the Justice Department and a continuation of lack of support for affirmative action.

But while my brother, Michael, believes that Jackson’s candidacy still has validity, I no longer do; my brother still sees the Jackson campaign for the long-term symbolic effect.

I want to see more emphasis on action than on symbolism. I believe that Jackson has humanized the presidential race. I also agree that he is the most interesting and compelling speaker in either party. However, the fact remains that he is not electable. The numbers are not there. He is not going to be the nominee, and he is not even going to be on the ticket. With that information a given reality, I think that all people who want the best of all possible political worlds for our country should support the Democratic ticket. I do not want to relive the days of unrealistic euphoria and abject humiliation brought about by the Democratic ticket of 1984.