Barking RINO, essay 7 "A Party of (Better) Ideas"

Barking RINO                                                                        Essay 7

A Party of Ideas

"In his book ‘7 Habits of Highly Effective People’ author Stephen Covey suggested that readers “sharpen the saw” by investing time in reflection and spiritual growth. Borrowing from Covey’s idea, successful political parties operate on ideas which ideally lead to campaign victory. In the highly contentious landscape that political society operates in today, seemingly ideas that stray too far from the norm are castigated by being branded as insufficiently conservative. Those who advocate a different line of thinking are labeled RINO’s. 

What seems to be rising to the surface is that if the singular objective of our party is to win elections…and if long term success of the party is based upon having better ideas… and if you agree it is difficult to propose ideas that include self-reliance, discipline and something other than the cynical tactic of using governmental benefits, then perhaps we, as a party, should examine more closely the ideas that we support with the objective of leading to better governance. Ideas should be vetted based upon quality and outcome rather than mere dogma. Over-reaching ideals at the cost of pragmatic governance can lead to impractical laws void of real world application and therefore potentially divisive with a significant cost at the polls.

At this juncture I do not want to propose any new ideas. I do want to suggest that we examine on the process of vetting ideas.

Start with the basic question; “What are the ideas that we as a party agree upon?” As with any group or association, fundamentally we will not agree on what these are. But there should be over-lapping agreements and a consensus of ideological direction but, I suggest, if one agrees with everyone and at all times – then what one stands for is fluid and insufficiently defined.

The proposal is not that we all agree. The proposal is that we look for the over-lapping ideals with the full recognition that healthy, thinking people disagree on some things and agree on others.  Identify the cohesive ideas that bring us together, recognize the direction and then embrace new ideas and approaches which pragmatically fulfill this agenda.

Within the sphere of political philosophy, “truth” can withstand all challenges. In other words, ideas that have been tempered by rigorous debate will eliminate bad ideas, incorporate better ideas and unify the constituency by hearing all the voices wanting to be heard. As the demographic sands shift, openness to new ideas and new voices will create a flexibility that replaces the brittleness that has led to Election Day losses.

Valid ideas do not have to be protected; certainly political opponents are going to attack our ideas – we should beat them to it. Ideas that have not been vetted are weaker ideas, or at least untested, than ideas that have been honed in the fires of respectful debate.

To say this differently, by respectfully challenging the ideas that have defined our party; today as well as in the past (and they differ sharply), we sharpen our saw with better ideas that are not so easily dismissed by the moderate middle (which all elections are incumbent to attract.) Ergo, the validity of someone’s political thought is not in their label or in their immediate agreement but in their willingness to respectfully challenge ideas yet abide by the post-debate results. 

The process of vetting ideas means ending the self-defeating paradigm of “RINO.” As engaged members whose commonality is better liberal governance (in the Lockean sense), disciplined values and self-reliance, we should engage in tactful and critical examinations of our ideas: this means debate and, once the vote has been cast, unity rather than the current castigation. Public debate based upon mutual respect engages a wider scope of participants creating a chorus of opinions which meld into better ideas that lead to victory at the polls. And if we are not together with the intent of winning elections – then we need to answer an even more basic question, “Why does this party exist if we are not interested in winning elections by offering better ideas which lead to better governance?”

Jean Stothert, Hispanics, and the Future of the GOP

The Barking RINO                                                               Essay Five

Hispanics and the Future of the GOP

In the 1970’s and 80’s conservative white Southern Democrats migrated over to the GOP. Among the many reason for the move, a prime impetus was Northern liberals aligning with the GOP to push for civil rights. (Zelizer, 2004) By not relying on population as the means to draw up Congressional districts, Southern conservative Democrats diluted voter blocs in order to maintain ‘safe seats’ and thereby cling to seniority and thus power in Congress. In 1962 the U.S. Supreme Court case, ‘Baker v. Carr,’ the court ordered districts be drawn based upon population. (See: Wesberry v.Sanders, 1964) This finding would result in urban votes having the same strength as rural votes. In 1965 the Voting Rights Act was passed to further enfranchise Americans whose vote had historically been marginalized by procedural maneuvers. The long term result was that although African-Americans remained marginal voters, they voted Democrat.

When Jean Stothert soundly defeated Jim Suttle to become Omaha’s next mayor, she handily won a majority of the Ward 4 or Hispanic South Omaha by taking nearly 57% of the votes. Of the three precincts that were lost, the tallys were 49.1%, 48.1% and 42.5%.

According to the non-partisan research center PEW, only 24% of registered voters are Republicans. (Partisan Polarization Surges in Bush, Obama Years, 2012) This means the Republican base is no longer sufficient to elect a president. (The Hispanic Challenge and Opportunities for Republicans, 2012)

Racial fertility rates indicate that there will be no majority race in America by 2050. A fertility rate of 2.2 is required to maintain a population. Currently Euro-American (white non-Hispanic) fertility rates are 1.8. The highest fertility rates are Hispanics at 2.4. While all immigrants represent 13% of the American population, their fertility rate represents 23% of American births. (U.S. Birth Rate Falls to a Record Low; Decline Is Greatest Among Immigrants, 2012)

In short, a GOP that clings to the language of fear and race (See voter ID) over the pragmatic pursuit of winning elections is destine for the dustbin of history.

Party Registration by Race

Party	White	white trend	Black	black trend	Hispanic	hispanic trend
GOP	32%	Down	5%	down	11%	flat
Dem	26%	Down	69%	up	32%	down
Independent	38%	Up	22%	flat	46%	up

Source: http://www.people-press.org/2012/06/04/section-9-trends-in-party-affiliation/

North American has always been a nation of immigrants. From the Mongolian land-bridge that brought Native Americans here 10,000 years ago to groups that arrive daily. The expectation of all immigrants is learn the language, learn the norms, assimilate into the Middle Class and pay your taxes. When South High School’s soccer team recently raised the Mexican flag at their victory, is that so different than the Shamrocks and fervent celebration by Irish-Americans of St. Patrick’s Day or Omaha’s St. Stanislaus Polish Festival?

If the contemporary GOP wants to remain viable and win elections then it must be inclusive. The recent RNC report, ‘Growth & Opportunity Project’ list 15 steps to reach out to Hispanics which should, based upon shared value systems, fit comfortably within the GOP; although some disagree. (Williams, 2013) Perhaps most important is how the GOP conducts itself during the forthcoming Immigration Reform negotiations. Specifically, the Party needs to employ intelligent use of language while holding to the value of support for legal immigration.

What’s clear is that table turning lessons of the Civil Rights movement and the eventual transition of Southern Conservatives into the GOP are before us again. Will we acknowledge history and learn from it? Or will we choose race over our shared values thus handing an insurmountable advantage to liberal ideology?

The Administration of Mayor Jean Stothert has the opportunity to reach-out to Hispanic South Omaha and solidify support for the Nebraska GOP which is based upon the shared values of equality, strong families, religion, entrepreneurialism, legal immigration, fiscally conservative taxes and government expenditures, life and women’s rights (Women are the more active Hispanic voter.) Stothert received these votes in May and now has the precious opportunity to earn them for the future. By ramping down hurtful rhetoric and pursuing a long term relationship, Republicans have an opportunity to build a lasting coalition that bridges the present to a future of winning elections and growing individual freedom for all Americans, native-born or naturalized. (Jordan, 2013) (Kagan, 2013)

Works Cited

Center for Disease Control. (2010). Births - Final Data for 2010. Retrieved from National Vital Statistics Report: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_01.pdf

GOP Seen as Principled, But Out of Touch and Too Extreme. (2013, February 26th ). Retrieved from Pew Research: http://www.people-press.org/2013/02/26/gop-seen-as-principled-but-out-of-touch-and-too-extreme/

(2013). Growth & Opportunity Project. Washington D.C. : The Republican National Committee.

Jordan, J. (2013, June 10). Tea Partiers to Omahas New GOP Mayor. Retrieved from Nebraska Watchdog : http://watchdog.org/88313/tea-partiers-to-omahas-new-gop-mayor-make-bold-budget-cuts-big-changes/

Kagan, D. (2013). Illegal Aliens - What do they Cost, What Can We Do. Retrieved from Nebraska Tax Payers for Freedom: http://netaxpayers.org/alerts/illegal-aliens-what-do-they-cost-what-can-we-do

Partisan Polarization Surges in Bush, Obama Years. (2012, June 4). Retrieved from PEW Research: http://www.people-press.org/2012/06/04/section-9-trends-in-party-affiliation/

The Hispanic Challenge and Opportunities for Republicans. (2012, December 12). Retrieved from Resurgent Republic: http://www.resurgentrepublic.com/research/the-hispanic-challenge-and-opportunity-for-republicans

Total Fertility Rate by Race and Hispanic Origin: 1980 to 2008. (2010). Retrieved from United States Census Bureau: http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0083.pdf

U.S. Birth Rate Falls to a Record Low; Decline Is Greatest Among Immigrants. (2012, November 29). Retrieved from PEW Research: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/11/29/u-s-birth-rate-falls-to-a-record-low-decline-is-greatest-among-immigrants/

Williams, J. (2013, February 11). Opinion: GOP image toxic with Hispanics. Retrieved from The Hill: http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/juan-williams/282145-opinion-gop-image-toxic-with-hispanics-

Zelizer, J. E. (2004). On Capitol Hill- the struggle to reform Congress and its consequences, 1948 - 2000. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Inside, Outside: "Talkin' about a Revolution" Essay 7, The Barking RINO

The Barking Rino                             Essay 7          

The Value of Internal Criticism

In her highly cited text, ‘Who Counts as an American,’ noted political scientist Elizabeth Theiss-Morse, writes that the most dangerous member of a group is the member which is critical of the group.[1] The natural inclination of group members is to defend the group; thereby assuring one’s own membership. Group membership should be earned rather than rewarded and this creates value because membership is exclusive. However, Theiss-Morse warns the reader that when the group defends its borders from marginalized members or outsiders, there is a threat that the group fails to embrace new ideas, evolve and remain vibrant in its mission…eventually becoming irrelevant.

The modern Republican Party is not beyond criticism. You only have to attend one Central Committee meeting and listen to the conversations among board members to know that. While the sycophantic media[2] encourages us to demonize those across the aisle, one wonders what is the value of further dividing America. Does division win elections? Abraham Lincoln quoted the Bible[3] when he said that, “a house divided cannot stand.” I want to suggest that members of the GOP consider greater tolerance for constructive criticism of our own party; both from outside and from within.

An ageless question of political activists and partisans is, ‘What is the role of government?’ While the answer should be unique to each individual, as the Conservative party, generally, we agree with Henry David Thoreau when he wrote, “The government is best which governs least.” [4] But how do we come to these conclusions? When was this agreement cast?

Among the fundamental freedoms granted is the Constitutional right to dissent; as discussed in the latter portion of the first amendment.[5] Why? Because, as Thomas Jefferson alludes to in the Declaration of Independence, we agree to lend our government, “just power”[6] Ergo, logic tells us, when government operates with ‘unjust’ power, we need to exercise the right of dissent to lend our voice towards steering the nation in a direction we, as a party or as individuals, feel is best. But how do we know? We don’t really. We can believe with great conviction but if Prohibition or legal slavery taught us anything, it is that the masses have the ability to be terribly wrong. But aren’t we smarter today? “Only a fool would say that.”[7]

What is the method by which we can direct national government? Can your single vote determine the direction of a nation of 330,000,000 citizens? Probably not. But as a member of a major party, we have the ability to influence the conversations among activists and partisans and thereby lend direction to the party…provided we speak up.

Think about it this way; is it better to vet ideas among friends or among foes? By tolerating constructive criticism from within, we can improve proposals and ideas so that when these ideas are thrust into the public square, these ideas better withstand the inevitable criticisms that alien partisans will provide. Vibrant contemporary examples of poorly vetted political ideas include the disaster that is the Affordable Care Act and our party’s own Voter ID proposals. Both would have benefitted from better internal criticism and, eventually, the blast furnace that a “loyal opposition” will provide. We cannot expect leadership from elected officials or those seeking election since theirs is a precarious position already. We, the party members, need to lead in this endeavor.

As a party, to some, we seem hell bent on ridding the structure of Rinos. While ideas that are brief and can be easily digested sell well on the campaign trail, one wonders if such a stance is politically expedient. What is the role of a political party? I suggest it has one function and one function only: electing party members to office. Winning elections require votes. If nearly half of the base is forced to walk the gang-plank, simple mathematics indicate that winning the elections becomes very difficult. [8] [9] We know that so called moderate Republicans are more willing to cross party lines when voting than are right-leaning Independents. [10] Ideas need to be framed in language that appeals to moderates and independents – to argue otherwise is to be intentionally mathematically naïve.[11]

So here’s where we tie this altogether; can the GOP win elections using parlor tricks and tactics? We’ll soon see. But what we seem to know from the Reagan years, is that a party with better ideas, ideas that appeal to a wider audience, will win elections. As Reagan demonstrated, Americans want to feel good about themselves, their country and, most especially, their fellow countrymen. We want to believe that tomorrow will be, “a new day in America.” Where is that vision today?

When we, as a party, stop selling the hope of a new “inclusive”[12] future: selling it with better ideas that actually solve real problems, then one might wonder why the party exists. The rise of Independents demonstrates that, perhaps, this is the reason why both parties have declining membership. As Theiss-Morse suggested, if the in-group becomes so entrenched in not engaging the constructive comments from its own; by tolerating debate and dissent, then the group becomes a dysfunctional echo-chamber incapable of winning elections. As Thomas Jefferson told the members of the Danbury Baptist Church, ‘I could not disagree with you more about what you say but I will defend your right to say it.’ (ED: The rise of the Independents and the declining membership in both major parties is all the proof that is needed that internal criticism must be tolerated and, in fact, encouraged or the party becomes stale, ineffective and (carried to the extreme) will eventually implode.)

Works Cited

Bible - New International Version. (1991). Grand Rapids: Zondervan .

(2012). Growth and Opportunity Project. Washington D.C. : Republican National Committee.

Iyengar, S., & Hahn, K. S. (2009). Red Media, Blue Media: Evidence of Ideological Selectivity in Media Use. Journal of Communication, 19 - 39.

Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012). Affect, Not Ideology A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 405 - 431.

Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling Alone . New York: Simon and Schuster.

Theiss-Morse, E. (2009). Who Counts as an American? New York: Cambridge University Press.

Thoreau, H. D. (1849). (Resistance to Civil Government) Civil Disobediance. Walden: Walden.

---

[1] http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2011.00854.x/abstract

[2] (Iyengar & Hahn, Red Media, Blue Media: Evidence of Ideological Selectivity in Media Use, 2009)

[3] Matthew 12:22 – 28

[4] (Thoreau, 1849) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Disobedience_(Thoreau)

[5] “or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”

[6] “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,” http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html

[7] Steely Dan song and lyric from the album Aja.

[8] http://www.gallup.com/video/121313/republican-democratic-parties-seen-extreme.aspx

[9] http://www.people-press.org/2013/02/26/gop-seen-as-principled-but-out-of-touch-and-too-extreme/

[10] http://www.people-press.org/2013/07/31/whither-the-gop-republicans-want-change-but-split-over-partys-direction/

[11] See Barking RINO essay #6 regarding the use of language in the political arena.

[12] (Growth and Opportunity Project, 2012)