In honor of the Bush twins’ first official interview last week, let’s take a look at how the press treats politicians’ children on the campaign trail.

A number of newspapers across the country have either covered campaigning kids – from the twins to Kerry’s daughters and John Edwards’ brood – or opined about their role. Few ask politicians about the role their children play in the campaign. Even fewer ask adult children pointed political questions. Granted, the twins’ first interview was with Vogue. Still, consider the questions they were asked:

What do you plan to do after graduation? (Teach at a charter school; work in Europe/Africa). Why did you join the campaign? (Not at parents’ urging). What are your parents like? (Dad’s hard on their prospective dates; Mom’s a clean freak, but funny).

The New York Times’ Elisabeth Bumiller summed it up best: “The article, which is light on politics and heavy on fashion, also reveals that the president is an avid teaser of his daughters’ boyfriends.”

Perhaps we don’t need to know more – what they think of the war in Iraq, for instance. Do we really care?

Sure we do. First, because their parents hold them out as an extension of themselves. As reporters at the Houston Chronicle (among the top 10 highest circulating papers in the country) observed: “The twins’ presence in the Bush campaign will help to soften the president’s image and possibly garner support from young Americans. ‘Surrounding yourself with family always tends to make you appear to be more human, softer,’ says Garth Jowett, a communications professor and propaganda expert at the University of Houston.”

Second, we care about their views because they have placed themselves on the stump. They purport to be well-educated, have grown up in the political spotlight, and as a result, may be considered public figures.

Julie Hines at the Detroit Free Press wrote a thorough article about campaigning children Monday
that examined both the role they play and their potential impact. The piece implies that since reporters/the public aren’t out to press kids for comment, their major role is as family-endorsing eye-candy.

In that case, the Edwards children – dubbed “replacement kids” during his North Carolina campaigns and now likened to the Camelot clan – could have a major impact. “During the first day of joint appearances by the Edwards and Kerry families, the Edwards tykes stole the show,” the story notes. “John Kerry joked at one point that Jack had become the new campaign manager.” So could Kerry’s own two adult daughters, who plan to campaign for him. Vogue is already talking to them about a piece similar to the twins’ spread. Then there’s his wife’s son Chris Heinz, 31, who’s been heavily involved in the campaign and likened to JFK Jr.

As Hines notes, “The conventional wisdom is that sons and daughters of candidates don’t have much impact on elections. They smile and make nice with the public, but they don’t change outcomes. But this year could be different, especially if polls continue to show President George W. Bush and Sen. John Kerry in a tight race, says Doug Wead, author of ‘All the President’s Children.’ ‘In a close campaign, absolutely everything counts, including the children,’ says Wead.”

The public – and the media – certainly cared three years ago when they were caught with a fake ID and alcohol in a Texas bar. And it seemed Bush spokespeople expected more after they graduated in May. “With their graduation from college and joining the campaign, there’s certainly going to be more coverage of them, and that’s understandable,” Gordon Johndroe, spokesman for First Lady Laura Bush, told The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank. “However, they are not public officials. When they engage in campaign activities, certainly there will be media interest. But when they’re going about their own work, we hope the media will respect that.”

But if the public wants to know what they’re thinking, shouldn’t adult children on the campaign  trail be asked hard questions about those they’re promoting? The New York Daily News’ Lloyd Grove, who doesn’t think kids will have any effect on the campaign, doesn’t think so. “Are people going to vote on the Jenna issue,” he asked Hines, “Or the Iraq issue?” But so many political questions of the moment – about the war, gay marriage, the economy – have been termed family values issues, particularly by conservatives, it seems ridiculous to think family members shouldn’t be pressed for answers, or at least opinions.

For now, it appears the kid gloves are still on. Washington Post Style writer Robin Givhan considers the Vogue spread indicative that the twins won’t be pressed on the campaign trail. “Those who spend any time on such trails argue that the goal is not to reveal one’s real self but a perfectly polished and eloquently scripted facsimile,” she writes. Chelsea Clinton made her press debut at a Versace show, after all, with a puff piece in Talk. “But the portrait does offer this: They are ready to play a new role … In their life story as told in public photographs, they’ve gone from indiscreet college students to Stepford daughters. One longs for photographs that tell of the intellectual curiosity that took them abroad or of the ‘natural effervescence’ that Reed (the author) found so compelling.” If only we didn’t have to rely on photographs or press releases to know what they’re thinking.

In The Fray Contributor