Some very promising green shoots are appearing at this time for those of us who would like to return the United States to the vision of its Founding Fathers: the pursuit of life, liberty and property through strictly limited government and the rule of law. The emergence of the Tea Party as a significant political and social force, under the exceptional entrepreneurial leadership of Sarah Palin, has seriously disturbed the duopoly control over the political process exercised by the Democratic and the Republican Parties. The fact that the current political establishment reacts with a mixture of incredulity and mockery at this manifestation of resistance demonstrates the threat that it poses to those who live off the fruits of progressiveness.
Let us suppose that Tea Party candidates out-perform expectations in the November 2010 elections and establish a significant toehold within the Republican Party. Further suppose that the GOP acknowledges this invasion, and determines to refocus its behavior from that of engrossing to that of reducing the size and the role of the federal government. From the perspective of public choice how, most effectively, might it proceed over the period 2010-2012?
Let us suppose that the GOP secures a small majority in the House of Representatives, while narrowing the gap in the Senate to a differential of 52: 48 in favor of the Democrats. In my judgment, this is the most likely outcome. It is also the perfect outcome for a reconstituted GOP that has decided to roll back the state. Let me explain.
While President Obama remains in office, the GOP most effectively will choose to play Defense, marshalling their efforts as determinedly as possible to encourage the progressive instincts of the left, while systematically thwarting their policy initiatives. To this end, they will forbear from logrolling, either in the House of in the Senate, save only where their own House majority threatens to slip away. They will send out a clear signal that cap and trade, card check, new trade protection, new regulations etc. will be blocked by a House firewall. They will hope that an increasingly frustrated President will vent his wrath by appointing ever- harder-leftist advisers and nominating ever- harder-leftist judges, all of which they will block through the Senate filibuster. They will know that a dis-functional President eventually will crack and expose his dark side.
If the GOP is successful in playing Defense, it might use the two years of interregnum to formulate a fully articulated, honest and transparent fiscal policy, designed to reform the federal tax system, and to reduce the size of the public sector, so as to rein in the federal government to no more than 20 percent of gross domestic product, operating under a balanced-budget rule. Such a policy manifesto would then launch its 2012 campaign to reshape fundamentally the political landscape of the United States.
Should the GOP be sufficiently lucky and sufficiently wise as to secure a 21st century Barry Goldwater or Ronald Reagan as its Presidential candidate, it might find itself, in January 2013, revelling in a new Morning in America. And we can rest assured that every Founding Father will then be rejoicing in his grave!
Tags: a new Morning in America, how the GOP might win big in 2012, the role of the tea Party, weakening duopoly control of federal politics
September 26, 2010 at 12:13 am |
The CINOs will fade away…Conservatives in Name Only.
Both Democrat and Republican.
To be replaced by new conservative candidates and perhaps even a new Party.
September 26, 2010 at 5:52 am |
Perhaps a new progressive party will also emerge. They will have a true social democratic agenda.
September 27, 2010 at 3:31 am |
Steve,
If such a part does emerge and seizes power, the destruction to the nation will be so huge to be unmeasurable.
October 16, 2010 at 7:09 am |
BF I agree with your comment.
October 6, 2010 at 1:16 am |
I find it very hard to believe that public investment in mass transit and alternative energy technologies, universal, single payer health care, federal jobs programs to create full employment and environmental protection can lead to “unmeasurable destruction to our nation” but then again I am neither a Libertarian or a Republican.
October 16, 2010 at 7:09 am |
Steve you are a fool, and extremely ignorant where economics is concerned.
Have a good long hard look at the decaying state of Europe. The fact that so many countries in Europe are in danger of collapse has more to do with socialism than anything else – this includes railway infrastructure, hospital and medical, education etc.
There is nothing wrong with the goal of full employment. In fact up until the 1970s Australia did a decent job of maintaining full employment, but it was at the expense of inflation, as well as the higher interest rates. An analysis of this post-war period prior to the 1970s is needed in order to cast some light upon what lies ahead.
Socialism does not work. This is especially true in Europe. It leads people into being extremely lazy. Greece is a good example of that laziness, and the riots there are an example of what happens when the rug has to be pulled from under these lazy individuals to make them realize that they cannot continue to live in a socialist paradise.
October 16, 2010 at 6:18 pm |
Steve,
It is not enough to say that caring for the environment or for the plight of other people is a “good”.
It is the means one uses to obtain goods that determines the improvement or destruction of society
It you kill a man for his money so that you can give such money to the poor is destructive to society though you have successfully satisfied your primary goal.
Thus, such is the failure of “Progressive” movements or any other political means to force an economic end. All of it ends in the destruction of the people, their prosperity and often of their lives.