Posted on 07/31/2013 2:12:54 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The Republican Party is divided—and the small-government conservatives, who want to reduce government’s size but preserve its institutions, are losing. Jon Favreau on the ruinous ideology that’s ascendant.
Nine months after a decisive loss in the 2012 elections, the battle for the soul of the Republican Party—or whatever’s left of it—has begun.
I’m not talking about a battle between moderates and conservatives. The conservatives won that fight a long time ago. Our children may never believe that moderate Republicans once roamed the Earth, advocating policies that would limit carbon pollution and invest in scientific research, reform our schools and build new roads, promote national service, reduce the influence of money in politics, and require individuals who can afford health insurance to take responsibility for buying it. Soon enough, these politicians will exist only in the minds of ’90s-era pundits and Aaron Sorkin’s writing staff.
The conservatives have finally purified the Republican Party, dispatching moderate infidels in primary after primary, demanding fealty to their agenda of huge tax cuts and drastically lower spending. They have used their sizable numbers in Congress to help realize that agenda, with periodic assists from a president who has always been more fiscally responsible than his enemies would admit.
Today the tax burden on the vast majority of families is lower than it’s been in decades. Domestic spending outside of Medicare and Medicaid is the lowest it’s been in more than half a century. A public sector that has grown under the last four presidents has significantly contracted under Barack Obama. And deficits are falling at the fastest pace in 60 years.
Conservatives remain unsatisfied. They want more tax cuts. More spending cuts. And I’m picking up signals that they’re not entirely thrilled with the Affordable Care Act.
But here, a new divide has emerged within the Republican Party. On one side are the traditional small-government conservatives, who have a rough acquaintance with the rules of politics and basic math. They may want to reduce the size of government further, but they also want to preserve the institutions of government, understanding that a functional democracy is necessary to provide for the common defense, promote a common prosperity, and tackle problems we can only solve together, as a nation.
These are Republicans like Chris Christie, who has witnessed the vital importance of robust federal aid in the wake of a terrible storm. These are Republicans like Jeb Bush, who has tried to reform public education without completely dismantling it. These are Republicans like John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and the handful of senators who have sought compromise with Democrats over issues such as immigration reform and finally ended the historically exceptional blockade of perfectly qualified executive-branch nominees so that the president can fill the jobs his administration is required to perform.
None of these actions have endeared the small-government conservatives to their rivals for power, the no-government conservatives. No-government conservatives take their inspiration from Grover Norquist’s famous quote that government should be shrunk to a size where it can be drowned in a bathtub. These Republicans, who make up most of the House and a healthy portion of the Senate, are on an uncompromising mission to abolish most government services, benefits, regulations, and taxes.
The goals of no-government conservatives are not primarily economic. They will propose more tax cuts in times of surplus and times of deficit. They care little when the nonpartisan experts and economists at the Congressional Budget Office say sequestration will cost up to 1.6 million jobs next year, or that immigration reform will boost our GDP, or that Obamacare will reduce the debt over time. No-government conservatives are not compelled by the evidence that temporary benefits such as food stamps and unemployment insurance put money in the pockets of those most likely to spend it at local businesses that will grow and create jobs as a result. Their only jobs agenda, their only growth agenda, their only deficit agenda is eliminating government, no matter how many people it helps or how big a boost it provides the economy.
Nor are the goals of no-government conservatives primarily political. They have advisers, they can read polls, and most of them probably know that shutting down the government or forcing a default would be, among other catastrophes, highly unpopular. They realize that rampant hostage-taking and filibuster-abuse are the chief contributors to the obstruction and gridlock that Americans of both parties hate.
They just don’t care. Jonathan Chait has written about the recent embrace of “procedural extremism” among many congressional Republicans, who have “evolved from being politically shrewd proponents of radical policy changes to a gang of saboteurs who would rather stop government from functioning at all.”
But for no-government conservatives, this has been their primary policy goal all along. Their fundamental philosophy is purely ideological—the idea that since government can’t do everything, it should do nothing. So as long as the public continues to see Washington as a dysfunctional circus of petty children, the conservative philosophy of government is vindicated. That is also precisely why no-government conservatives view the successful implementation of Obamacare as an existential threat—because it would prove that limited government intervention in the market can still be an effective force for good. It is why some Republicans are threatening a shutdown unless Obama agrees to defund the Affordable Care Act—a step they know can’t even be achieved through the annual budget process.
In 2016, Sens. Rand Paul and Ted Cruz seem to be the most likely champions of no-government conservatism, with Marco Rubio engaged in a delicate balancing act between purity and sanity. Whether Republican activists will still embrace traditional conservatives like Chris Christie, Jeb Bush, and others remains to be seen. But of one thing I am certain: while the single-minded pursuit of a no-government ideology may bring Republicans a fanatical sense of purpose, it will not bring them the 270 electoral votes needed to take back the White House, nor will it help our recovery gain the speed and strength it needs. The sooner the party faithful realize this, the better off the country will be.
This is often the tactic used on a local level whenever we conservatives oppose the latest county property/sales tax increase that will be used to expand the “good ole boy” payroll at city hall or the court house or the school board.
We will get accused of “wanting to do away with all government services” if we oppose the taxes, when in reality all we want is a slowdown in its growth rate.
Its the classic straw man argument.
An impressive victory by the author over the straw man residing in his leftist noggin. No government?
Jon, you ignorant slut.
After I read it, I noticed who the author was and realized why I couldn’t get through more than a paragraph of it...
“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.” ~ Frédéric Bastiat, The Law
A two-bit, punk ass little twerp whose only lot in life has been to write lies for sleazy politicians (Kerry/Obama).
Too young (born 1981)to know anything of which he (thru Obama’s lying mouth) speaks. Never had a decent job that required even a semblance of sweat, he likely never will.
Yet, before us today he stands before us conservatives and tells us what we think, do and how we act - AND how we should act. Of course he only has OUR best interests at heart.
He’s what I like to call a NEO-TRAITOR. A pompous little widget in the oppression party (Democrat). He advocates manna for all, even if they have to take it from someone to give to another. It does not stir his or their conscience because they’ve never had to go out and do real work for anything. Just lie, promise and keep campaigning.
Since he’s out of work now, my guess is that he’s angling for a job in 2016 - better hurry Rubio and snap him up. He’s a real catch!
My first thought after reading this was how anybody can reach such a state of “fantastic”. My second thought was absolutely no way do I want to find out the answer to that question!
Not to be confused with the actor/director of the same name.
If this guy thinks these are Conservatives, then he is so far to the left it defies definition.
These are the "moderates"--the leftists--in the GOP, and there isn't a true Conservative among them.
As for the rest of us, those of us who would gladly pare Government back to its rightfully Constitutional proportions, we have not yet begun to fight!
“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society.”
Spirited: As ancients believed that the King, Pharoah, etc. was a divine being, an extension of their god, then it followed that all things, including citizens and slaves belonged to the King.
Though Leftists by whatever label they apply to themselves haven’t publicly declared their own godhood, they nevertheless worship themselves and believe that they know better than the “unwashed masses” what they ought to think, how much if any they should be allowed to have, who should be allowed to live and who should die, and so on.
If the gov't service is a total waste of money you better believe this conservative wants to "Do Away" with it!
This guy writes Obaam’s speech’s???????
Well that answers a lot of questions.
I always thought they were written by someone who is mentally challenged.
Today the tax burden on the vast majority of families is lower than it’s been in decades. Domestic spending outside of Medicare and Medicaid is the lowest it’s been in more than half a century. A public sector that has grown under the last four presidents has significantly contracted under Barack Obama. And deficits are falling at the fastest pace in 60 years.
Does anybody have a reply based on fact or are we just going to fulminate on this thread?
What!!!! Can you believe there are these people WHO DON'T WANT HUGE TAX INCREASES!!!! WHO DON'T WANT BIG GOVERNMENT TAKING OVER EVERY ASPECT OF CITIZEN'S LIVES!!!! WHAT'S WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE THAT THEY DON'T TRUST BIG GOVERNMENT!!!
Typical lib/leftist blather.
I like that. That describes these types perfectly. I'm going to steal your line.
Man, that is GREAT. Needs to be repeated over and over and over again!
“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.” ~ Frédéric Bastiat, The Law
nathan, nothing wrong with a little fulminate in the morning - it stirs well in my coffee.
I don’t need a number to know a lie.
That statement you referenced is a bold lie.
Since when have facts assuaged liars?
I’m good. You’re good.
What’s wrong with a little fulminating? This jerk is advocating for huge government and lying about conservative goals and actions. No conservative has ever said there should be no taxes...only unnecessary ones. Obama has spent more in a little over one term than all previous admins combined.
Tell you what, head over to any thread about sports in public schools and try to tell me how most of those so called TEA party, no-government Republicans are for one penny of smaller, let alone no government.
The closest thing to no-government Republicans was the libertarian wing of the party, and most of us left the party last year when we finally got sick of being treated like abused house fraus.
The author of that bowel movement being passed off as an article needs to scrape up some change and go buy a clue.
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.