If You Are a Traditional Republican You Should Be a Democrat Today

Some may disagree but I think that most historians would say that the American experiment in democracy was a liberal experiment. The early American leaders were heavily influenced by ideas of unalienable right of the individual, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, separation of church and state, due process in law, equality under the law, and the like. These were ideas gleaned from 18^th century thinkers mainly of the Scottish Enlightenment such as David Hume, Adam Smith along with John Locke, Thomas Hobbes and others.

In America this grew to include graduated income taxes that tax the wealthier more than the poor, welfare programs to aid the poor, major government spending on education, job-retraining of the unemployed, equal opportunity and expanded civil liberties.

Along side this in our country conservatives had strong beliefs in tradition (particular Christian religion traditions), traditional ideas of families, opposition to gay rights and abortion, favoring lower taxes, support of states rights, and a strong military and aggressive foreign policy. You can add to this believe in a small government, limited regulations, school prayer, capital punishment and the like.

When the country was small, little government was needed and free enterprise worked well as communities were smaller and a lot of self-regulation took place.

In the 19^th century and a few large companies began to flex their muscle we found violent changes taking place in the economy with most of the income going towards the power brokers; about the same amounts as we have today. That ended with the stock market crash.

Folk on both sides of the political aisle found Keynesian economics (supply side economics) helped them out of a yo-yo economic by putting government policies and regulatory agencies into place. Monopolies were broken for a more fair play in the market and government spending (and debt) spurred growth in the economy and the American Dream seemed viable to almost all Americans.

In the North you had more Democrats than Republicans with the Democrats base in education and unions. Republicans then as now were supported by business. The South was primarily Democratic but with significant conservative beliefs – Dixie-Crats. The moderates of the South and the North made for Democratically dominated congresses but they reflected diverse and similar values.

Then beginning with the election of Ronald Reagan the parties began to become more separated and combative. Reagan still reflected some Keynesian beliefs along with most of congress but supply side economics began to take hold. Lower taxes for the wealthy, and deregulation began to emerge and the to dominate but there were enough moderates to keep healthy debate alive.

As I mentioned in an earlier piece the civil right movement and policies taken during the Lyndon Johnson administration alienated the Southern Democrats, which began to align themselves with their ideological cousins in the north. And, Republicans became better organized politically than the Democrats giving them congressional power.

I am currently reading Winner-Take-All Politics by Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson. It is a major read but I believe gives a lot of clarity to the political situation we find ourselves in today. A situation where a large portion of the country does not clearly understand as they did not have the experiential history of the years when we were not so politically polarized and did not have winner take all politics and all that goes with it.

Hacker and Pierson see this form of politics generally taking place in the 1990’s, when radical conservatism began to dominant national discussion. It is essentially the George W. Bush years yet I don’t think he is the one we should focus upon as I believe he just got caught up in the flow but was not a major architect of this style of politics.

I think we have to look at the South, perhaps in particular Texas (but not only Texas) to find the origins of this movement. The movers and shakers seem to be Tom DeLay “The Hammer” and “born again Christian who became the Rep. House Majority Leader in 2003-2005; Newt Gingrich who was Rep. Speaker of the House from 1995 to 1999 known for his “Contract with America” (one also might want to recall the Jack Abram scandal of this era); Dick Armey, Rep. House Majority Leader 1995 – 2003 known as an engineer of the “Republican Revolution”; Mitch McConnell Rep. Minority Leader of the Senate 2007 – now; Trent Lott, Rep Senate Majority Leader 2001 Jan – June; Bill First, Senate Majority Leader 2003-2007. Add to these Bob Dole from the Mid-West, Senate Majority Leader 1995-1996; and John McCain of the West.

To get a feel for the new Winner-Take-All agenda look at the platform of the Texas GOP Platform of 2000 which included: a return to the gold standard, abolishing the Federal Reserve, eradicating minimum wage and social security (the later over time), repeal of the 16^th amendment (taxes) and the elimination of the IRS. Major players here include George Bush, Tom DeLay, Dick Armey, and Phil Gramm.

Now comes along the Religious Right with newfound political clout with interests in tax support of private schools (after desegregation), no to abortion etc. Jerry Farwell was happy with his Moral Majority, which got lots of press in little impact, and Ralph Reed’s Christian Coalition, which rated politicians voting records according to their agenda. They boosted the Republican ranks with more intolerant positions.

Bit the big players here come from the business world. Small business had difficulties with regulations that were mere irritants to big business. The National Federation of Independent Businesses had 600,000 members at its peak. Also the Chamber of Commerce became more radicalized particularly against the Clinton Health Plan. [e.d. I never understood this as it was in business self interest to have a single payer plan that would save them money.]

That’s a lot of stuff and I’m not half way through their book. But what does seem clear to me is that the entire country has made a major shift to the left, Republicans and Democrats and the Winner-Take-All mentality is real and destructive to the country and to debate.

The Democratic Party has contributed to this mess as well. The Democrats have climbed into bed with big business, Wall Street and the Banking community to get the dollars to get elected and helped continue deregulation to the benefit of business at the expense to the people.

Government is supposed to be of the people and for the people. The Winner-Take-All mentality has a total disregard for this major democratic principle.

When we will be able to elect political representatives that represent the people not special interests?

I’ll keep on reading as see what these fellas have to say.

Oh yes, back to the title. I am convinced that if you follow the trends in both parties you will find that the traditional Republican values of the 50's and 60's are far better represented by the Democratic Party today than the Republican Winner-Take-All party. But you have to understand the history and the ideology then and now.

As for the old Democrats or Progressives like myself; we are a lonely lot, with the wild idea that all of us should be winners and non of us losers in the republic.