Follow the election from a restaurant perspective

I'll be blogging live tonight to cover the races where restaurateurs will be vying for a ticket to Capitol Hill. Check back as soon as the results start rolling in.

Politics as unusual

The public’s interest in politics has been honed to a keen edge by the uncertainty over who’ll be sitting in the Oval Office next February. But the restaurant industry has been doing less handicapping than hedging. Indeed, the trade’s main lobbying forces have been quietly seeking insurance of sorts to protect the trade’s political interests regardless of who prevails in the November election.

That was evident during last month’s board meeting of the National Restaurant Association. As we reported at the time, the group voted to pursue an initiative whereby restaurateurs would be solicited to work in the campaigns of whichever candidate drew their support. The objective was to have a member of the business inside the tents of what were then the three main candidates. “When they win, we want friends who were friends [to them] before they won,” explained Bob Leonard, the IHOP franchisee who heads the NRA’s Political Action Committee.

That effort to curry favor with Democrats as well as Republicans has been seen in other actions by the group, large and small. For instance, as was noted earlier in this space, the association lined up John McCain to deliver a keynote address at its annual mega-convention in Chicago. I and apparently others chided the NRA for always selecting a speaker from the more sympathetic side of the aisle instead of taking a nonpartisan approach to booking presenters. In press releases issued after McCain appeared, the association noted that Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama had been invited to appear as well but had declined. It didn’t sound like the same NRA that had once boasted about its insider status with the Republican White House. It was as if it quietly removed that elephant pin from its lapel.

Fast forward to earlier this week, when the association and its longtime ally, the National Council of Chain Restaurants, formally praised a new law that aims to protect restaurants from being sued for printing credit card expiration dates on charge receipts. Obviously the two groups had pushed for the measure. They succeeded in part by working with Rep. Barney Frank, the liberal Democrat from Massachusetts, and Sen. Chuck Schumer, a party standard-bearer from New York. These are not the industry’s usual allies.

The NRA and its usual cohorts haven’t switched allegiances, to be sure. The group reportedly spent $200,000 last week alone to help one of its own, former chairman Ed Tinsley, win the Republican nomination for a U.S. House of Representatives seat from New Mexico. The association has very expressly indicated that it wants a member of the industry inside the Capitol, watching out for the business and presumably working closely with it to promote favorable measures. It’s hardly standing on the sidelines in that contest, and the party it favors is no secret, at least in that Congressional race.

But clearly its striving to work with the party that’s quite possibly going to control both the White House and the Capitol next year.

Every time restaurateurs are surveyed about what they regard as their biggest concerns, burdensome politics and regulation rank high on the list. If the industry slipped into a partisan mode in the current environment, that concern may move even higher.

Instead the NRA and the NCCR are taking a more pragmatic course. And it could prove a smart one indeed.

Beltway bets

It was like popping into an airport bar to catch the playoffs and finding a stranded Joe Buck and Tim McCarver perched on stools, offering their play-by-play to a select crowd that happily included you. In the dullest of years, attending the National Restaurant Association’s Public Affairs Conference makes you feel like a Washington insider. Catching the annual political download at a time like the present, when the presidential race is fuzzier than Phil Spector’s hair, was akin to getting a D.C. zip code. Elsewhere in the nation, pundits may still be wrangling over which candidates will get the nominations of their respective parties. But everyone inside the Beltway seems to have a solid hold on who the final contestants will be. And the wonks gladly shared that information with restaurateurs attending last week’s conference.

Almost certain to top the Democratic ticket, presenters agreed, is Hillary—though Mike McCurry, a former press secretary for her husband, added a major asterisk. If her performance in the early bell weather primaries suggests she can’t win the general election, the party faithful will likely abandon her for more of a centrist candidate like John Edwards. Why put money and party machinery behind such a polarizing force?

For that reason, Clinton’s chances of returning to the White House were portrayed as unlikely.

Likely to face her in the general election, McCurry and successor Ari Fleischer both noted, will either be Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney or Fred Thompson. In further analyzing the situation, the former presidential spokesmen noted that Thompson is the Great Unknown, with the mien and outsider credentials of the Great Communicator, Ronald Reagan. But, as Fleischer said, the question is, “is there any there there?” Is Thompson an actor playing a role, or a genuinely wise, principled conservative of impeccable integrity?

Romney was likened to the Energizer Bunny, the battery-charged, in-the-pink phenom who just keeps going and going and going. They noted that he also has solid business experience, having founded the private-equity behemoth Bain Capital. Yet nothing was said of his political stance, perhaps because it’s changed like the seasons since he caught the attention of Massachusetts voters in his run for governor. Other pundits have noted that the voting public of that state hardly match the political composition of the national populace.

And that left Giuliani, about whom they said virtually nothing positive or negative. Which, judging from some of the other political handicapping that was offered aloud during the conference, is the modern-day equivalent of having FDR’s oratorical skills, JFK’s money, and OTB’s designation as a favorite.