How two ducks out of water can walk a centrist path to victory this November

Chris Shays is a Peace Corps veteran. He’s pro-choice, took a leading roll in passing the assault weapons ban, and is co-chairman of the Friends of Animals Caucus. Just a few days ago, senior organizations nationwide lauded him for pushing back against President Bush’s proposed cuts to Medicare benefits, and also fought against him on drilling in ANWR and tax incentives for oil companies. In 2006, Shays called for a withdrawal timetable for America’s forces in Iraq.

It may come as no small surprise, therefore, to learn that he’s a Republican.

It might come as less of a surprise to learn that as a Republican Shays is facing a tough reelection fight in Connecticut’s fourth district this November. In an election cycle where merely having the word Republican in the same sentence as your name can hurt your numbers, Shays – literally the only Republican Congressman in new England – despite his bipartisan voting record and his ability to both challenge his home party and advocate on its behalf to his many friends across the aisle.

Shays entire political career is framed by his dedication to national service opportunities. After serving in the Peace Corps, he went on to fight for America’s national service program, and was one of fifty-three Republicans to vote for last year’s GIVE Act. Just recently he co-sponsored a bill that would protect the ability of charity programs to help middle- and low-income Americans purchase housing. His website states that in his political career (should it survive November) he will “continue to support federal funding for distressed urban regions, college loans, Early and Head Start programs, student access to technology, literacy initiatives and new SMART grants for math and science.” This is just short of an open call for the increased presence of AmeriCorps-sponsored programs to help America’s troubled public schools, and provide the reciprocal benefits to those who serve in them.

His opponent, Democrat Jim Himes, is currently leading in the polls but has no such similar plan. Chris Shays needs to bring national service into the campaign, to explain how and why he has supported the kinds of national service programs that have been applauded nationwide, what they can do about both Shays’ and Himes’ education agendas – and why he has the credentials that his opponents don’t.

It’s still an unfortunate fact that national service does not have a strong single-issue-voter constituency. However, because “national service” is such a broad term that overlaps with support for education, the environment, the homeless, the disaster-stricken, churches, those recovering from addiction, and countless other patches in the American quilt, a candidate who is willing to innovate through national service opportunities may just triumph over the one who doesn’t in a close race such as CT-4’s.

However, if Shays can rally the moral authority and political support to carry the day this November, he may get to look forward to some company from another New England Republican. Carol Shea-Porter, a Democrat who bumped off Republican incumbent Jeb Bradley in 2006, ran an election described as “a one-note campaign focused on her opposition to the Iraq war. Now with the economy and gas prices dominating the political discourse, her challenge is to become a more well-rounded candidate.” Though the Partisan Voting Index describes her precinct as “R+0” – basically, a dead tie with the Republican Party holding some statistically-insignificant lead between 0% and 1% – even a mere tie should surprise New England voters headed into a season where the Democrats are expected to make further gains in the House (…see above).

Carol Shea-Porters’ campaign website’s description of her education plan makes national service a self-evident cornerstone of her platform:

Teachers are under increasing duress and feel unappreciated. Their schools are often under funded, they are underpaid in many districts, and they are asked to wear many hats. Most of these dedicated professionals spend their own money to provide teaching tools in their classrooms. They need our help to accomplish our shared mission, which is to arm each child with a defense against poverty–a quality education.

…While I do support measures that help schools improve, these measures must be fair and take into account the realities of the community that these schools serve.

Whether this is used verbatim from an early draft of a City Year mission statement has not yet been confirmed.

Shea-Porter, though also a GIVE Act supporter, lacks any solid position on national service. Frankly, what is she waiting for? When New Hampshire turned officially blue in 2006, both parties should’ve gotten the message that even New Hampshire’s traditionally libertarian culture is ready for a state with stronger public services. An innovative solution that meets this culture halfway – working with AmeriCorps to provide needed services through private non-profits – may inspire voters in a way that the traditional technique of “throwing money at the problem” usually associated with Democrats would not.

If Barack Obama’s money machine has demonstrated, this is a campaign about innovation. In races such as these, where candidates outside of party lines have to cast a wide net during campaigns, simply proving oneself an original thinker with a mind that thinks outside an ideological mold could be the way to victory. Every successful candidate in tight races – think George Bush reaching out to security hawk Dems in 2004, Bill Clinton reaching out to fiscally moderate conservatives in 1992 – must have a way of building consensus on key issues. As one of the most popular unspoken causes currently on the table, national service could be just that cause for both of these neck-and-neck races.