Bush Policies Stray From Republican Principles
August 5, 2004
This op-ed appeared in the Tampa Tribune on Aug. 5th.
By: Richard S. Conley
Richard S. Conley is associate professor of political science at the University of Florida and coordinator of political science studies in Aix-en-Provence, France. His research focus is on the U.S. presidency and comparative executive leadership.
The violence following the transfer of sovereignty to the new Iraqi government should give conservatives pause. Three months before the presidential election, where have the policies of George W. Bush and his coterie of neoconservatives led the Republican Party?
In 2001 many moderate Republicans were alarmed by Vermont Sen. Jim Jeffords’ defection from the party – a defection precipitated by Bush’s hard turn to the right in the domestic sphere. Since then, the war on terrorism has all but extinguished the intra- party debate over Bush’s policies. Rather than engage the voices of moderation in the party, the White House and congressional leaders have been content to silence those who question Bush’s stances.
Pre-Empting States
In domestic and foreign policy, the Bush White House has breached many of the historical links to the federalist, civil libertarian, antideficit and bipartisan internationalist traditions that once defined the Republican Party.
A dubious doctrine of pre-emption has guided Bush as much on domestic policy as on foreign affairs. The federal principles elaborated by James Madison in the Federalist Papers appear lost on the administration. The White House has had few scruples about pre-empting states’ prerogatives.
Bush’s “No Child Left Behind” project represents one of the most extensive federal intrusions into state education policy undertaken in recent decades. For decades Republicans clamored for the abolition of the Department of Education. Ironically, Bush has sought to empower that very agency.
Bush is also prepared to betray the federal principle on the issue of gay marriage. The Defense of Marriage Act enabled states to refuse to recognize civil unions or gay marriages performed in other states, which they would otherwise be constrained to honor under the “full faith and credit clause” of the Constitution. Yet Bush supports a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage across the nation.
Since when have Republicans argued that the federal government knows best? Eisenhower defended states’ rights concerning tideland oil claims. Nixon’s New Federalism agenda sought to turn back responsibilities to the states in the wake of Johnson’s Great Society. Much of Reagan’s early legislative agenda aimed at reducing federal regulations on the states.
The Bush administration has also challenged the fundamental wisdom of the Founders of the republic on civil liberties. Why does the open- ended war on terrorism demand the indefinite suspension of the guarantee of essential freedoms? The Patriot Act, combined with Attorney General John Ashcroft’s actions, has broadened government capacity for surveillance and criminal investigations – not simply of foreign nationals, but of U.S. citizens.
Ballooning Deficit
Bush has unquestionably endangered modern Republicans’ historical claims to be the party of sound fiscal management. He has lifted his veto pen not once against congressional profligacy.
Republicans must engage in the introspection necessary to set the party’s fortunes on a path commensurate with the principles of federalism, constitutionalism, rational economic management and internationalism that once defined the Grand Old Party – and made the United States the envy, rather than the pariah, of the international community.