Vanity: Conservatism in the 21st Century

The ghost of President Reagan is ever present in this election year as each GOP candidate seeks to claim the mantel of conservatism as their own. But there is a fault in the ongoing debate. Conservatism is rooted in the ideals of freedom and liberty. Harkening back to the greatness of President Reagan without championing the ideals on which he stood, without a willingness to continue the fight for the things in which he believed, without the ability to communicate and convince the people of this country that the greatness of America rests in them - the people – is a fruitless and aimless endeavor. Calling out the name of President Reagan while ignoring the foundations on which he stood amounts to little more than political pandering. The American people in general, and conservatives in specific, see through the charade.

Despite what the pundits may say we do not hope to resurrect Ronald Reagan. He was a man who stood alone at a singular moment in history. As a man he will never be forgotten. Perhaps bandying about the name of a political hero makes for better news than understanding the truth. It is not the man we seek, rather it is the basic ideas of conservatism, the very core that defines Republican principle, that we long to resurrect. We seek a candidate dedicated to those ideals, with the courage to wave high the banner of bold hues, unafraid of competing openly in the arena of ideas.

Where is the Republican candidate in 2008 who will say aloud…?
“I don‘t know about you, but I am impatient with those Republicans who after the last election rushed into print saying, “We must broaden the base of our party”—when what they meant was to fuzz up and blur even more the differences between ourselves and our opponents.
It was a feeling that there was not a sufficient difference now between the parties that kept a majority of the voters away from the polls.”

The GOP faithful, the ones whom many of the political televangelists want to call the disaffected right wing, believe that what America needs now is what we needed then - a true conservative. We seek a conservative for the 21st Century who will articulate the ideas and ideals of core conservatism, who will champion causes that will enable our nation to overcome obstacles and defeat the enemies of freedom, and who will inspire our people to greatness.

Conservatism has been defined in the past as a three legged stool consisting of social issues, economic policy, and national security. While that definition is true there must be something that combines these legs into something that is more than three sticks which cannot stand on their own. That bond, the seat to the stool, the plank at which those legs come together and thus become more than the sum of their parts, is and must be the Constitution of this great land. Constitutional integrity is the tie that binds.

Much has been written of the fracture within the Republican Party in this election year. There seems to be a struggle as to which leg of the movement will dominate, a battle over which element of modern conservative philosophy will rise as the strongest. Believing that conservatism can be defined more clearly by any one leg is the folly of the debate and the root source of the schism. Each leg is important, and each must be strong, but what must be understood clearly is that it is only when they are bound together in a common cause that these legs become the true conservatism that has proven time and again to be right, sound, and effective.

National Defense
The Constitution states clearly that the federal government is obligated to provide for the common defense of this great land. In order to live up to this responsibility the government must have a defense strategy centered on the following:
- Commitment to strength
Our military and security services must be the strongest, most effective, and most efficient forces in the world. Anything less is unacceptable. This requires adequate funding for the personnel, equipment, and technology that will not only meet the challenges of today, but that will ensure that we as a nation are ready for the threats of tomorrow.
- Commitment to strong and secure borders
Our enemies have demonstrated their intention and desire to attack our nation and our people from inside our homeland. Enacting such measures as are necessary to provide proper border security is a Constitutional obligation of the government. The preservation of our country requires that our borders – air, land, and sea – be secured immediately. It must be understood that people and goods entering the United States do so only when permission has been granted.
- Commitment to effective intelligence
In order to defend against determined enemies the government must seek to obtain information from all available sources. Effective real time intelligence requires a long term commitment to national security that recognizes both active enemies and emerging threats. Standards of operation must place a premium on timeliness and effectiveness.

Fiscal Policy
It must be understood that government income is a finite quantity. There exists a maximum value which the government can collect. Income policy, and therefore tax policy, must be based on efficiency and long term planning. Truth #1 – marginal rates for both income and corporate taxes can and do affect the economy at large, and thus have a direct impact on national income. Truth #2 – marginal rates for both income and corporate taxes can and do affect the amount of income that is reported and therefore available for collection, and thus have a direct effect on national income. (An ancillary to this understanding should be that the tax code is in desperate need of revision. The sheer bulk and complexity of the tax code is in and of itself an inhibitor to collection of necessary, fair, and reasonable taxes.)

The government should commit immediately to gaining a clear understanding of the effects of tax policy on both the economy at large and federal income. The tax policy of the government should be based then on long term efficiency seeking the intersection of the two curves. In short the question should be – at what point does the government generate the most revenue while providing an economic framework that promotes free market growth?

Promoting growth is a key element – at the point where any curve nears the peak there will be a loss of efficiency, and beyond that peak economic numbers decrease. Increasing the revenues to the treasury at the expense of general economic growth is contrary to conservative philosophy. Growing the government at the expense of the populous is not acceptable. Any review of income policy should necessarily include consideration of governmental regulations and alternative tax policies including but not limited to flat taxes and consumption taxes.

It is a complex question, but it must be the start of the conversation. Spending policy cannot be discussed rationally absent an understanding of income.

Once the potential income of the government is quantified budget discussions may begin. Spending must be prioritized and it must be capped below projected income. Priorities must be established based on the Constitutional obligations of the government – like any reasonable personal or business budget the needs must take precedence over the wants. Defense and security must top the list. Service of the national debt must also be a priority. America must be true to her word. Fiscal policy must at all times be based on the precept of necessity first.

A suggested starting point is a 5 point plan:
1) Establish based on empirical data the optimum intersection of economic growth and federal revenues. This will establish the maximum revenues available to the government before considering expenditures. Institute a long term tax policy based on this data. The ‘benefit of the doubt’ must be given to the people meaning that in any decision of tax rates the lower available rate will be employed.
2) Commit to a complete review of government expenditures based first and foremost on the Constitutional responsibilities of the federal government. The government must be able to say that it is meeting a clear Constitutional responsibility before it takes money out of the pockets of the people.
3) Establish a spending plan that sets the maximum expenditures at 80% of the predicted revenue or the indexed outlay of the previous year, whichever is less. Short term economic corrections may affect year-to-year income. Establishing a spending rate well below the projected income rate will mitigate deficit spending.
4) Commit to a legislative budget process based on providing complete transparency. The federal budget should be broken up and require individual congressional approval for each executive department. No expenditures shall be authorized without specific identification of the responsible executive element and without a recorded vote of both houses of the legislature.
5) The status of the treasury shall be evaluated at the end of each fiscal year and reported to the people in accordance with Article I Section 9 of the Constitution. The public shall be informed of this report. If it is found that income has outpaced expenditures then a minimum of 50% of the surplus funds should be dedicated to servicing and retiring the national debt.

When the budget is under control, and when the debt of the nation is absolved, the process should start again. Our government should never be looking for new areas to spend the people’s money, but rather they should continually seek new opportunities to relieve the burden the government has placed on the people.

Social Policy
At its core the Constitution establishes the responsibilities of the government and insists that rights belong to the people. The government must be dedicated to protecting the rights of the citizenry – that is the oath that each government representative and official takes upon entering office.

Social policy has long been defined in terms of morality by politicians and pundits on both sides of the aisle. Reevaluation of federal social policy in terms of the proper and Constitutional role of the federal government is necessary.

On many issues including life, marriage, the environment, and social welfare programs the federal government – through all 3 branches – has claimed authority not established within the Constitution. While many of these issues are of paramount importance to conservatives it is time to recognize that the federal government is neither empowered to solve many such issues, nor has it ever proven itself effective in such endeavors. Conversely, the ability of the people to affect social change is magnitudes greater on the state and local level where citizens have input through ballot initiatives and direct access to local officials.

In evaluating social policy the question should be asked, as it should of any federal policy, as to whether the federal government is the proper place for resolution of the issue at hand. If the federal government is not Constitutionally empowered to handle such an issue then the next question should be – is this an issue worthy of fundamental changes to our government – does this issue support a structural change to the very Constitution which we hold dear?

Constitutional Integrity
It has been said the United States Constitution is a living breathing document. If that is construed to mean it is as relevant today as it was 230 years ago, then yes that is true. The Constitution is a limited document assigning responsibility to the federal government and establishing that rights reside with the people and the states.

There is within the Constitution an established process by which that document may be changed. It is imperative to the future of this nation that the Constitution as a whole be respected, and therefore the dictates of Article 5 must be respected by all branches of government.

The executive is not empowered to assume authority not given by Article II, and is obligated to veto any law passed by the legislature which exceeds their rightful authority as given in Article I. The legislature shall be mindful at all times of their Constitutional role and shall not seek to exceed their given authority. The judiciary is not the proper seat for alteration or amendment of the Constitution and thus any and all members of the judiciary must be mindful of their proper role within the government. All members of the government shall be bound by their oath to protect and defend the Constitution.

Amendment to the Constitution should be addressed carefully, soberly, and with great deference to the original document. (The lessons of history regarding such amendments should serve as a guide: the 13th, 14th and 19th amendments were long overdue, and the 18th was clearly ill-advised.)

Conclusion
Conservatism – the advocacy and defense of the people as the sole seat of all rights and therefore the sole seat of authority for the government, the advocacy of a strong national defense as necessary for the preservation of this Union, the advocacy of sound and reasoned fiscal policy as integral to our continued existence, and the insistence on clear and respectful deference to the limited government set out for this Constitutional Republic by our founders – remains relevant. Conservatism at its core represents the greatest hope for not only this nation, but the Constitution and Republic which conservatism seeks to defend remain the beacon of freedom sought by people throughout the earth.

In closing I defer not to an interpretation of what President Reagan might have said, but rather I will quote him directly.
“Our people look for a cause to believe in. Is it a third party we need, or is it a new and revitalized second party, raising a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand on all of the issues troubling the people?
Let us show that we stand for fiscal integrity and sound money and above all for an end to deficit spending, with ultimate retirement of the national debt.
Let us also include a permanent limit on the percentage of the people’s earnings government can take without their consent.
Let our banner proclaim a genuine tax reform that will begin by simplifying the income tax so that workers can compute their obligation without having to employ legal help.
And let it provide indexing—adjusting the brackets to the cost of living—so that an increase in salary merely to keep pace with inflation does not move the taxpayer into a surtax bracket. Failure to provide this means an increase in government’s share and would make the worker worse off than he was before he got the raise.
Let our banner proclaim our belief in a free market as the greatest provider for the people.
Let us also call for an end to the nit-picking, the harassment and over-regulation of business and industry which restricts expansion and our ability to compete in world markets.
Let us explore ways to ward off socialism, not by increasing government’s coercive power, but by increasing participation by the people in the ownership of our industrial machine.
Our banner must recognize the responsibility of government to protect the law-abiding, holding those who commit misdeeds personally accountable.
And we must make it plain to international adventurers that our love of peace stops short of “peace at any price.”
We will maintain whatever level of strength is necessary to preserve our free way of life.
A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.
I do not believe I have proposed anything that is contrary to what has been considered Republican principle. It is at the same time the very basis of conservatism. It is time to reassert that principle and raise it to full view. And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their way.”
Ronald Reagan
March 1, 1975

2 posted on 02/04/2008 7:35:51 PM PST by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)

There is no conservative strategy and there are no conservative leaders who carry the banner, there’s just conservative voters who want what they want from the political forum without regard to expending effort to get it.

5 posted on 02/04/2008 7:46:12 PM PST by bmwcyle (the Beltway crowd is like a bunch of women who have started menstruating together)

Republican Conservatism is spreading beyond America’s borders. In countries all over the world, most notably China, free enterprise is bringing prosperity to various nations. This fact gets no publicity and is attacked by American Conservatives as “Golbalization”
For fifty years or more the world Socialists, with the help of the United Nations, have been spreading their propaganda. They want to have a world government run by them. They have leaders in every country on Earth. Where are the Conservative world leaders? Leaders that will bring cooperation between countries to further capitalism. Can you name any?

Thank you for posting this essay, it is uplifting when little else is from a lot of Freepers.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.