Republican revolution (Part 1) • The great experiment • Foreign Affairs • The Economy The great experiment In 1994 U.S. Rep. Newt Gingrich engineered a Republican takeover of the U.S. House and proclaimed the dawn of the “Republican revolution.” Gingrich
Republican revolution (Part 1)
• The great experiment
• Foreign Affairs
• The Economy
The great experiment
In 1994 U.S. Rep. Newt Gingrich engineered a Republican takeover of the U.S. House and proclaimed the dawn of the “Republican revolution.” Gingrich is no longer in Congress to gloat, and some basic tenets of that revolution have been abandoned, but he may have been right all along.
Eight years into GOP control of Congress — except for two years when Democrats controlled the Senate — and three years into George W. Bush’s presidency, Republicans have accomplished what Gingrich set out to do: change the way government works.
Overseas, America is flexing its muscle. At home, the federal government is battening the hatches against real and imagined threats and priming a great economic pump from which benefits ostensibly will flow to everyone. You can argue that it’s about time, or you can argue that the revolution is a train wreck waiting to happen. But for better or for worse, a massive philosophical shift in the role of government is driving public policy.
Foreign Affairs
Bush’s foreign policy of righteous unilateralism is a dramatic shift from the nation’s stance during the Cold War. Cold War policies stressed multilateral alliances, international organizations and deterrence. But in the wake of the unprecedented Sept. 11 attacks, neoconservative advisers convinced the president that preemption — in defense of homeland — must replace deterrence, and that unilateral action is required when international organizations dither. This provided the philosophical and psychological justification for invading Iraq without waiting for allied sanction or U.N. approval.
The verdict on the new foreign policy awaits the long-term results in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Efforts to democratize the two nations have so far cost $160 billion and more than 400 American lives.
The war in Iraq has alienated many allies and worsened anti-American feelings across the Arab world. The Israeli-Palestinian peace process has foundered, while the worst manifestations of internecine agony — wall-building and suicide-bombing — continue apace.
Democratic presidential candidates have failed to present an alternative approach for protecting the nation from terrorists. Voters are uneasy with the Iraqi invasion, but believe Bush offers the most effective leadership against terrorism.
Bush clearly has solidified the GOP’s electoral advantage as the party people most trust on security.
The Economy
Bush and the GOP Congress have transformed the U.S. tax code on the theory that lower taxes — especially on the wealthy and on capital — will launch a burst of business investment that will lift all boats. Down went the tax brackets, taxes on stock dividends and taxes on capital gains.
The transformation was sold as “economic stimulus,” and to a degree it has been. The economy is picking up after three years in the doldrums. It is likely that some of the 2.3 million jobs lost since Bush took office will be restored by November.
But even as they cut taxes, Bush and Congress abandoned traditional Republican aversion to huge deficits. They cranked up government spending, mostly for the war on terrorism, homeland security and war in Iraq. In 10 years, the national debt is expected to grow by $5 trillion — almost $17,000 for every man, woman and child in America.
Core GOP doctrine holds that economic growth will power America out of its deficit. If doctrine is wrong, the nation’s gigantic debt will slow growth just as the Boomers retire. Even if that occurs, conservatives may snatch victory from the jaws of defeat by forcing a smaller government.
St. Louis Post-Dispatch
The second part of this editorial is scheduled to appear in the Tuesday, Dec. 2 issue of The Garden Island.
