Annie
Diamond Member
- Nov 22, 2003
- 50,848
- 4,827
- 1,790
Where are the Libertarians? I don't feel at home with the GOP.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7185555/#050324
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7185555/#050324
March 23, 2005 | 11:24 PM ET
In their book, The Right Nation: Conservative Power in America, authors John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge predict steady growth for the conservative movement in America, unless something goes wrong to derail its trajectory. But things can always go wrong. How could the Republican coalition fail? By being "too Southern, too greedy, and too contradictory."
Right now it's aiming at two out of three. Greed, of course, is not uncommon in politics, but as David Brooks notes, it's on the upswing, with Republicans engaging in the very kinds of behaviors they deplored from Democrats:
Back in 1995, when Republicans took over Congress, a new cadre of daring and original thinkers arose. These bold innovators had a key insight: that you no longer had to choose between being an activist and a lobbyist. You could be both. You could harness the power of K Street to promote the goals of Goldwater, Reagan and Gingrich. And best of all, you could get rich while doing it!
Before long, ringleader Grover Norquist and his buddies were signing lobbying deals with the Seychelles and the Northern Mariana Islands and talking up their interests at weekly conservative strategy sessions - what could be more vital to the future of freedom than the commercial interests of these two fine locales?
Before long, folks like Norquist and Abramoff were talking up the virtues of international sons of liberty like Angola's Jonas Savimbi and Congo's dictator Mobutu Sese Seko - all while receiving compensation from these upstanding gentlemen, according to The Legal Times. Only a reactionary could have been so discomfited by Savimbi's little cannibalism problem as to think this was not a daring contribution to the cause of Reaganism.
Not very impressive. Nor is Jack Kemp's behavior in "actively shilling" for Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez. And, of course, the bankruptcy "reform" bill -- which, as I mentioned earlier, was a giveaway to big business -- seems to have been based on greed, too.
There's also a lot of contradiction lately. After talking about small government and the rule of law, Republicans overwhelmingly supported a piece of legislation intended to influence a single case, that of Terri Schiavo. As former Solicitor General Charles Fried observes:
In their intervention in the Terri Schiavo matter, Republicans in Congress and President Bush have, in a few brief legislative clauses, embraced the kind of free-floating judicial activism, disregard for orderly procedure and contempt for the integrity of state processes that they quite rightly have denounced and sought to discipline for decades.
I think he's right. As with Bill Hobbs, quoted below, I don't have an opinion on what should happen to Terry Schiavo -- though given the rather large numbers of judges who have looked at this case over the years I'd be especially reluctant to interfere. Can they all be deranged advocates of a "culture of death?" But regardless of the merits, Congress's involvement in this case seems quite "unconservative" to me, at least if one believes in rules of general application. Florida has a general law, and it's been followed. That people don't like the result isn't a reason for unprecedented Congressional action, unless results are all that matter.
Ryan Sager looks at this, in conjunction with last week's hearings on steroids and baseball, and comments:
In coming years, political historians might look back and try to pinpoint the day or week or month that the Republican Party shed the last vestiges of its small-government philosophy. If and when they do, the week just past should make the short list. For it was in this last week that the Republican-controlled Congress made it clear that it sees no area of American life -- none too trivial and none too intimate -- that the federal government should not permeate with its power.
It can all be summed up in two words: steroids and Schiavo. If there is an issue less deserving of Congressional attention than whether a few overpaid, bat-wielding jocks might have injected themselves with substances to help them wield their bats better, then it has yet to be discovered by the House's Government Reform Committee, which held last week's hearings.
...
But if Congress' dealings with the trivial are appalling, they are nothing compared to its exploitation of the tragic.
There, we have the sad case of Terri Schiavo, the Florida woman in a "permanent vegetative state" whose feeding tube had been removed at her husband's urging -- and based on a court's findings regarding her wishes on the matter only to have Congress and President Bush intervene ostensibly on her behalf.
Putting aside the tangled facts of the case for the moment -- which include some bitter family history and selective science on both sides -- the driving question here should be: Does Congress have a role?
And when it comes to a family dispute over a painful medical decision, one which at least 19 judges in six courts have already adjudicated, the answer must be a resounding "no."
The forums for matters such as the Schiavo case are state courts, upholding state laws. Conservatives, especially religious conservatives -- who want Roe v. Wade overturned and the issue of abortion moved back to state legislatures and courts -- should understand this better than any other group of Americans.
A while back, I wrote about the problem of "fair-weather federalism," but judging by the past week things look to be getting much worse. So will the Republican coalition fracture under these pressures?
Quite possibly. National security is the glue that has held Bush's coalition together. The war isn't over, and we haven't won yet, but it's going well -- Austin Bay notes that it's a war that we are winning -- and this is allowing the divisions to show. All of the people I've quoted are on the right, and they're all unhappy. One may argue that libertarians and small-government conservatives aren't a big part of Bush's coalition, but his victory wasn't so huge that the Republicans can surrender very many votes and still expect to win. So this is a real threat. (Some people are even writing articles with titles like Saving the Marriage: Conservatism and Libertarianism.)
Can this marriage be saved? Only if one of the partners -- and it's not the libertarian side -- realizes that its behavior is hurting the marriage, and decides to restrain itself. Are conservatives capable of sufficient self-restraint? On the evidence, that's not to be taken for granted, and it may cost the Republicans. In fact, National Review blogger Jim Geraghty reproduces a couple of reader emails that illustrate how costly it may be:
Just to let you know - this conservative Republican, who has never voted for a Democrat... will probably start doing so - against my financial interests I might add - solely because of the Schiavo action by Congress. I am staunchy pro-life but in this instance the matter has been litigated over and over, and the evidence is overwhelming that a) there's no hope for recovery for this woman and b) her wish would not to be forced to continue in this horrible state. (and yes, i am putting a value to life - hard to imagine anyone wanting to live this way - it's just common sense) I find her parents' actions unconscionable (the action of putting video of this poor woman out all over the world - how cruel), though I certainly understand the desire to see their child improve....
---
I'm Republican voter, voted for Bush twice, with high enthusiasm both times...
Today you asked:
"In November 2006, voters across the country will turn against the GOP because they fear that Congress will pass individually-targeted laws that prevent patients from being deliberately starved to death?"
This voter might. I am very, very unhappy right now. Use whatever language you like. This "law," using the word loosely, makes a mockery of federalism.
Geraghty thinks there aren't many voters like this out there. Republican strategists had better hope he's right.
I can't believe this has happened in less than 6 months from the election. 
