Jim Stillman
Nevar
The GOP has lost touch.
May 19th 2008 01:06
For the past 28 years, the Republican Party professed to believe in and follow the core principle of Ronald Reagan’s view of government. Repeatedly, Mr. Reagan stated, in varying venues and contexts, that “government was the problem, not the solution”. This rule was in the mind of liberal-progressives to be an oversimplification and, in essence, an abdication of government responsibilities. The end, as envisioned by Mr. Reagan, was a minimalist Federal government; regulation of airlines, food and drugs, occupational safety, the financial markets, all were to be left to the mercies of the private sector. If there was an overwhelming increase in foreclosures, a lapse in food inspection because of loss of inspectors, fraudulent manipulation of pensions, less regulation of airplane regulations, then the private market would correct the problem.
With the diminished role for government, there could be a corresponding reduction in taxes, especially for the wealthier population. (This not just editorial bias: nearly all employed persons pay regressive payroll taxes; the very wealthy pay a much small proportion of their income for such taxes.)
The traditional values of the GOP were, before the Reagan era, often observed more in the breach. They were, domestically, a non-intrusive, minimally active government;
internationally, GOP values supported a quasi-isolationist point of view. On the other hand, Democrats, generally, supported an activist Federal presence, willing to address social ills, regulate businesses and corporate and personal behavior. Thus, wage and hour laws, child labor laws, food and drug inspections, civil rights legislation were all the result of activist Legislatures, Presidents and Courts.
As a result of several Congressional races during the past months, in which the Republicans lost three seats in the House of Representatives, it has become clear that the GOP mantra of limited government has been repudiated by the American people. Part of the reason is that people want government services (even if the voters do not want to pay for them). But the most significant reason the GOP has “lost its way” can be placed at the door of George Bush.
In many respects, it really doesn’t matter who wins the next election. The die has been cast. Regardless of who takes the oath of office in January, the principle that reigned for so long, the notion that government is useless, if not inherently evil -- is no longer operative.
All three of the remaining presidential candidates propose a far more activist role for government. Even John McCain, who tells conservatives that he's a Reagan disciple, proposes far-reaching government action on issues such as climate change, high energy prices and the mortgage crisis -- problems that are supposedly better left to the cruel genius of free markets, according to the old rule that George Bush has pushed to absurd extremes.
It took a leader of Mr. Bush’s special gifts to kill the philosophy he professes to worship. To be fair, there is one area in which he has been the most proactive of presidents, to our nation's lasting discredit: Violating the basic rights of citizens and noncitizens alike in the name of his "war on terrorism." Never before has a President conceived of Rendition, wholesale warrantless searches and seizures, the consideration and even adoption of torture as approved policy.
Except for violating the rights of citizens, Mr. Bush has interpreted Reagan's small-government mandate as an excuse -- or an instruction -- to abdicate government's most fundamental responsibilities. Anyone who wants to argue this point need simply remember the "heck of a job" our government did in handling the devastation from Hurricane Katrina. We still haven’t repaired and restored New Orleans – but we can spend billions on a pointless and “unwinnable” war.
As we liberal-progressives have protested all along, Americans don't want their leaders to simply shrug, as George Bush shrugs, at the fact that 47 million citizens do not have health insurance or that there has been severe economic dislocations that stem from globalization or that man-made global warming is here, now.
It turns out that if government declines to adequately regulate or even monitor the financial system, unfettered markets can make catastrophic blunders. I doubt that families facing foreclosure are much comforted by being told that they're playing an essential role -- that of loser -- in classical free-market theory. A minimal government results in fewer as less well trained aircraft inspectors, food and drug safety officers, a lessening of FDA drug approvals and monitoring. We want and deserve more.
Americans want to preserve the environment and our national parks; we do not want government to sell off our land and resources to private business in the hope and prayer the purchasers will safeguard the public interest at the expense of profit.
Americans want government to institute windfall taxes to prevent gas prices at $4 0r $5 per gallon while Exxon has net profits in the billions.
Americans are tired of a government that is slavishly beholden to a rigid do-nothing ideology -- and that they're ready to punish the president's party for its ineptitude and lassitude. If the GOP is to be a responsible opposition party (and I hope it becomes just that), it had better refocus. And create new ideas.
With the diminished role for government, there could be a corresponding reduction in taxes, especially for the wealthier population. (This not just editorial bias: nearly all employed persons pay regressive payroll taxes; the very wealthy pay a much small proportion of their income for such taxes.)
The traditional values of the GOP were, before the Reagan era, often observed more in the breach. They were, domestically, a non-intrusive, minimally active government;
internationally, GOP values supported a quasi-isolationist point of view. On the other hand, Democrats, generally, supported an activist Federal presence, willing to address social ills, regulate businesses and corporate and personal behavior. Thus, wage and hour laws, child labor laws, food and drug inspections, civil rights legislation were all the result of activist Legislatures, Presidents and Courts.
As a result of several Congressional races during the past months, in which the Republicans lost three seats in the House of Representatives, it has become clear that the GOP mantra of limited government has been repudiated by the American people. Part of the reason is that people want government services (even if the voters do not want to pay for them). But the most significant reason the GOP has “lost its way” can be placed at the door of George Bush.
In many respects, it really doesn’t matter who wins the next election. The die has been cast. Regardless of who takes the oath of office in January, the principle that reigned for so long, the notion that government is useless, if not inherently evil -- is no longer operative.
All three of the remaining presidential candidates propose a far more activist role for government. Even John McCain, who tells conservatives that he's a Reagan disciple, proposes far-reaching government action on issues such as climate change, high energy prices and the mortgage crisis -- problems that are supposedly better left to the cruel genius of free markets, according to the old rule that George Bush has pushed to absurd extremes.
It took a leader of Mr. Bush’s special gifts to kill the philosophy he professes to worship. To be fair, there is one area in which he has been the most proactive of presidents, to our nation's lasting discredit: Violating the basic rights of citizens and noncitizens alike in the name of his "war on terrorism." Never before has a President conceived of Rendition, wholesale warrantless searches and seizures, the consideration and even adoption of torture as approved policy.
Except for violating the rights of citizens, Mr. Bush has interpreted Reagan's small-government mandate as an excuse -- or an instruction -- to abdicate government's most fundamental responsibilities. Anyone who wants to argue this point need simply remember the "heck of a job" our government did in handling the devastation from Hurricane Katrina. We still haven’t repaired and restored New Orleans – but we can spend billions on a pointless and “unwinnable” war.
As we liberal-progressives have protested all along, Americans don't want their leaders to simply shrug, as George Bush shrugs, at the fact that 47 million citizens do not have health insurance or that there has been severe economic dislocations that stem from globalization or that man-made global warming is here, now.
It turns out that if government declines to adequately regulate or even monitor the financial system, unfettered markets can make catastrophic blunders. I doubt that families facing foreclosure are much comforted by being told that they're playing an essential role -- that of loser -- in classical free-market theory. A minimal government results in fewer as less well trained aircraft inspectors, food and drug safety officers, a lessening of FDA drug approvals and monitoring. We want and deserve more.
Americans want to preserve the environment and our national parks; we do not want government to sell off our land and resources to private business in the hope and prayer the purchasers will safeguard the public interest at the expense of profit.
Americans want government to institute windfall taxes to prevent gas prices at $4 0r $5 per gallon while Exxon has net profits in the billions.
Americans are tired of a government that is slavishly beholden to a rigid do-nothing ideology -- and that they're ready to punish the president's party for its ineptitude and lassitude. If the GOP is to be a responsible opposition party (and I hope it becomes just that), it had better refocus. And create new ideas.
| 76 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Jeff Musall