“Most of the energy of political work is devoted to correcting the effects of mismanagement of government.” —Milton Friedman, Nobel Prize Winning Economist
In my current reading of Theodore Roosevelt: Preacher of Righteousness by Joshua David Hawley, I have reached the part of the Colonel’s life where he chose to make the ill-advised attempt to run for President for a third term, challenging his handpicked successor, incumbent Republican President William Howard Taft. President Taft had just been delivered a “shellacking” at the polls, losing 53 seats in the House to Democrats in his midterm election in 1910. While this was not as bad as the defeat handed to President Obama in 2010, it was a categorical public repudiation of a president and his party that left Colonel Roosevelt itching to throw his “hat in the ring”.
Juxtaposed in the book with this internal party strife is the ascent of Woodrow Wilson, which also began in 1910. Wilson, the Godfather of modern day “progressivism”, sought to develop a stronger coalition of Democrats by breaking from the restraints of the William Jennings Bryan populism they had linked themselves to in the previous two decades, resulting in failed attempts to win the White House in four consecutive elections. He was intent on developing a more modernized Democratic Party, one that could rival and ultimately defeat the Republicans who, though in power, were falling into complete disarray. Wilson saw an opportunity, and he would not let the moment elude him.
In reading about these century old circumstances, it dawned on me that there is another issue for Republicans to fault the President: the failure to transform and unite the weakened Republican Party.
Four years ago, Clinton Campaign architect James Carville wrote about the coming Democratic dominance that would last for forty years with the ascendancy of President Obama. Republicans had been in power in the White House for five of the previous seven presidential terms, and in his logic they had worn out their welcome. While forty years is an overstatement, Democratic dominance would not be so surprising for a sustained period of time. American politics is cyclical, and more often than not the American public becomes disenchanted with any party in power, such a Republicans for the last quarter century.
At the end of President Bush’s term, Republicans were faced with exactly that kind of disenchantment. The President never felt the need to explain his polices or defend attacks against them. His rejection of the media and other outlets he could utilize to reach the American Public ultimately turned these institutions against him. Congressional Republicans let their leadership slip into the coma of self-indulgence, oblivious to the corruption that was spreading in the Chamber. Republicans were in power too long, and they let it show in their nonchalance toward massive spending ventures which helped dig the gigantic hole of debt that we are in today. Democrats took advantage of that in 2006, and ultimately in 2008 when a fresh faced Barack Obama ran against the “politics as usual” caricature of Washington. His charisma, youth and appearance (the first African American President) led people like Carville to believe there would be actual change in the Capital. How wrong they were.
So wrong, in fact, that President Obama and the Democrats were challenged by the American citizenry within two years of their mandate. Though it is not odd for a siting President’s party to lose seats in his first midterm election (again, the American inclination to reject the party in power), the extent to which Democrats lost in 2010 was historical. The president overreached with his stimulus and Obamacare, allowing the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to drive their congressional supermajority off a cliff. In two years Mr. Obama’s radical approach to government squandered the Democrat’s opportunity to take hold of the Federal government and run the show. Their greed and hubris got in the way of responsible governance, ignoring the country’s growing awareness and concern over the national debt and an increasingly controlling nanny state. Now as the President scrambles for re-election by essentially ignoring half of the “accomplishments” of his first term, this good political fortune leaves Republicans dumbfounded.
As odd as it may sound, the President’s weakness and ineptitude as a leader has created a problem for the Republican Party. When parties are exiled from power it allows their members, and most importantly their leaders, to restructure their approach to government to fit the challenges facing the country. In 1910 Woodrow Wilson understood his party’s plight, and therefor plotted accordingly to draw on the emotions of the progressive reform movement to gain favor with the American public. Insofar, we have failed to see such advancements amongst the Republicans.
We currently are viewing a Republican Presidential primary notable for its volatility in polling, fueled by increasingly negative propaganda from all sides. This “he said, she said” approach to a Presidential campaign is not only undeserving of the public, but completely deconstructive for the Republican brand. Despite the failures of the Democrats in the last three years, Americans still have a bad taste in their mouth from the end of the Bush years, as congressional Republicans currently poll at an approval rating of 23%. Whether it is Mitt Romney speaking in platitudes about American exceptionalism or Rick Santorum’s angry tone on social issues, the candidates opposing our incumbent President do little to inspire the citizenry. Four years ago I don’t think any Republican would have imagined beating President Obama after his meteoric rise leading to the White House, and if he accomplished even half of what he promised in his first term this Republican field would be fittingly weak for this Presidential election. But without their time in exile from political power, a time that could have been spent formulating serious advancements in reconstructing the tax code, re-evaluating our Foreign policy initiatives in the Middle East, entitlement reform, expanding our energy resources, and so on- we put forward a Republican field to the American people that differs very little from the field in 2008. Only now, instead of pushing the country forward, men like Romney and Gingrich are forced to address the policies of a President who has reached so far left that the Bush-era Republican platform looks like relief from the policies we see today.
Though in this essay I “blame” the President for what we are seeing in the Republican race, I hope this can be taken both facetiously and seriously. Facetiously because the President is blamed for almost everything by conservatives like myself, and it is ridiculous to actually blame him for this weak roster of candidates we have trotted out before the American people for the last year. Though at the same time, it is a serious critique of Mr. Obama’s record in almost four years of governance. If he addressed the issues facing the country from the outset of his Presidency, like unemployment and the debt, as opposed to the Democratic love child of universal government-run healthcare, our country would be facing a much brighter future and most likely a smooth Presidential election for the incumbent. Instead, his insistence to ignore the challenges facing the American people face leaves the country in far worse shape than 2008, with no leader ready to solve these problems on hand.
– John P. Burns
tammanyhalldotcom 