Op-ed diversity, Washington Post style

The Washington Post’s op-ed page features column after column expressing left-liberal views. To the extent there’s variety, it’s between those who defend Joe Biden categorically and those who think his policies aren’t sufficiently leftist (but who rarely call Biden out by name).

The Post also carries a small number of conservative columnists who contribute intermittently. They are all smart conservatives and their commentary is welcome. (George Will, whom I sometimes disagree with but whom I consider a national treasure, regularly writes twice a week for the Post.)

Unfortunately, the commentary of some conservatives who occasionally write Post op-eds isn’t consistent conservative. Not infrequently, it focuses on areas as to which they agree with liberals.

Today, for example, Hugh Hewitt devoted his intermittent appearance on the Post’s op-ed page to criticizing Sen. Tommy Tuberville for blocking military promotions. Criticism of Tuberville on this score has appeared on the op-ed page before.

I agree with Hewitt that Tuberville’s action is ill-advised, though I think Hewitt is exaggerating the damage of it. But even if Tuberville’s blockade is as harmful as Hewitt says, surely there are outrages Hewitt could write about that aren’t Democratic talking points. (Maybe Hewitt thought that, as a conservative, he could add to the pressure on Tuberville to relent. With all the pressure already on the coach-turned-Senator, it seems very unlikely that Hewitt’s voice will make a difference.)

Yesterday, to cite another example, Ramesh Ponnuru devoted his intermittent appearance to arguing that Donald Trump should not campaign in favor of repealing Obamacare. The very next day, a liberal op-ed writer made basically the same point, albeit in a less informative and interesting way.

Ponnuru contended that although Obamacare was a “wrong turn” in policy, it makes no sense to repeal the program after 13 years and after important corrections to it have been made. Our health care system needs reform, he acknowledged, but the helpful reforms — such as greater use of competitive bidding in Medicare and updated and expanded health savings accounts — have nothing to do with Obamacare or its repeal.

I haven’t followed Obamacare closely enough to have an opinion on Ponnuru’s opinion, other than to say it seems quite plausible. But again, there must be liberal policy positions Ponnuru could have used his platform to critique.

I’m not criticizing Hewitt or Ponnuru. They can, and should, write about whatever they want to.

I just wish that the few conservatives whom the Post allows to write op-eds for its pages were ones who consistently wrote columns the paper’s liberal op-ed staff and editorialists wouldn’t write and don’t agree with. That way, the op-ed page would provide more diversity of opinion.

But I guess the Post likes things the way they are.