Campaign Argument and the Liberal Public Sphere: A Case Study of the Process of Developing Messages in a Congressional Campaign

An enormous literature on the status of the public sphere exists. Often drawing on the work of Jurgen Habermas (Calhoun, 1992; Habermas, 1989), rhetorical and argumentation scholars have developed several theories of the public sphere and analyzed any number of campaigns or public controversies (Calhoun, 1993; Fabj & Sobnosky, 1995; Finnegan & Kang, 2004; Fraser, 1992; Goodnight, 1982, 1992; Griffin, 1996; Gring-Pemble, 1998; Klumpp, 1997; Phillips, 1996; Triadafilopoulos, 1999; Warner, 2002; Weal, 1985; Willard, 1989). (1) Almost without exception, these theoretical and descriptive analyses have been conducted from the perspective of the critic of argument looking at public controversy. The argumentation critic has played the role of expert peering into the public sphere in order to draw conclusions. An alternative approach is available, however, in which the argumentation critic uses his or her experience in an actual public controversy as an entry point for testing the public sphere. Rather than peer into the public sphere, the critic uses practical experience with a controversy to draw inferences about the public sphere. In this essay, I employ this alternative approach, as a participant-observer during the past eight years in the political campaigns of Congressman Dennis Moore of Kansas. During these campaigns, I have played two contrasting roles. On one hand, I have been a practical rhetorician, helping the Moore campaign create messages that are both sensible in a policy sense and strategic in a persuasive sense. As a citizen-activist much like Andersen (1993) describes, I have relied on my training in argumentation, debate, and rhetorical theory. On the other hand, I have been a rhetorical critic, gathering messages, considering the rhetorical situation in which the messages were presented, drawing conclusions about which messages were effective and why, and assessing the degree to which campaign communications gave the public sensible reasons for voting. A dialectical dance between the roles of citizen activist and rhetorical critic should facilitate conclusions about the effectiveness of the public sphere in Dennis Moore's campaigns in Kansas' third congressional district. LIBERAL PUBLIC SPHERE THEORY My analysis is guided by liberal public sphere theory (Rowland, 2003, 2005). Drawing upon John Stuart Mill and especially James Madison, I have argued that an effectively functioning public sphere both provides the grounds for sensible decisions and legitimizes the choices made. An effective public sphere is essential for democracy; without it, the public has no means of making informed choices about issues or among candidates for public office. Before explaining how liberal public sphere theory guided my analysis of the Moore campaign, it is appropriate to justify this theoretical perspective. Such justification is especially important given the enormous influence of Habermas and others, writing from a broadly critical perspective on public sphere theory within argumentation studies. There are two primary justifications for taking a liberal approach to the public sphere. First, while it is common to hear academics cite liberalism as a failed political theory, in the larger political world a broadly liberal perspective is dominant. (2) By liberal I do not mean the political perspective associated with the contemporary Democratic Party, but a broader perspective on democratic institutions in the context of limited government, in which separation of powers and other legal restrictions protect individual rights. This broadly liberal perspective has been dominant in American politics for more than 200 years and encompasses both the contemporary conservative and liberal movements. Moreover, with the end of the Soviet Union and the decline of authoritarian governments more generally, this broadly liberal perspective has been ascendant across the planet. As Orlando Patterson (1999) writes, "liberalism reigns supreme as the leading and, one might even say, overwhelming doctrine in the West. …