What I've been hearing from Republicans in both the House and Senate has been a kind of attenuated, distorted echo of the economic doctrine that the party has preached, if not always practiced, since the Reagan years. It's perfectly appropriate, of course, to ask whether a specific spending proposal would have the desired stimulative effect; indeed, some items were removed from the stimulus bill for that reason. But underlying the Republican criticism has been a familiar formula: more tax cuts, fewer spending initiatives.
But Americans know that this philosophy has already taken us as far as it could. Americans know that taxes can be cut by only so much before the federal government's effectiveness inevitably suffers. Americans know that spending money doesn't necessarily mean wasting it. Americans know that the economic crisis means that taking the position that government is inherently oppressive, if not fundamentally evil, is now intellectually bankrupt, because government is the only instrument we have in the high-stakes attempt to induce financial and economic recovery.
If Republicans hadn't broken the bank with drunken-sailorish spending during most of George W. Bush's time in the White House, their complaints about the cost of the stimulus package and its impact on future deficits would be more credible. As things stand, we have to let actions speak: absolute solidarity among House Republicans in voting no.
While I would not agree with the tenor of Mr. Robinson's criticism, and do not agree with a few of his premises regarding tax cuts and spending intiative cuts, the most important theme of his arguments is one that all sides of the political landscape must come to realize: The political landscape has changed.
I do not mean to say that it has irrevocably changed, as American politics is the poster-child for cyclical movements. But for the moment the Republican party is standing on the wrong side of history. The issue now becomes whether or not the GOP will be able to recover in short order to the changing American mindsight and reform conservatism to become a viable option for the electorate. Like it or not, the last 8 years of President Bush's administration has harmed the ability of conservative politicians to act. Including, but certainly not limited to, the GOP nominee for President having to publically and repeatedly distance himself from the incumbent.
Given the United States history, I would normally postulate that the GOP would be able to hunker down with its current policies, weather the storm of their down turn on the wheel of American politics and return to prominence in 8, 12, or maybe 16 years. But this is not the case. Presently the Democratic Party and the Left are led by one of the better, if not best, political minds of the last decade. This is not to say tha I like or even agree with President Obama's views and policies, but it is indisputable that he is a consumate politician. His greatest act and ability is also the area that poses the gravest threat to American consevatism.
President Obama's campaign showed us the grand appeal he has for not only securing his political base of the Left but in consolidating the vast Center of American politics. What is telling about this is that his opponent, Senator McCain, thought he had a dualistic choice between either running a moderate campaign and losing the base, or maneuvering hard right to consolidate the base. he choose the latter with predictable results.
What I mean by all of this is that the GOP needs crucial reformation of its policies and stances. Not so much a reform per se, but a Renaissance. A return to our earlier past of such great minds as Willliam Buckley, Barry Goldwater, and (partially) Ronald Reagan.
What this entails is a rejection of the big government spending of the neoconservative movement, a rejection of the influence of those party members who advocate the regulation of our nations social aspects, and embracing the more libertarian past.
In short, in order for the GOP to survive, it must start being a viable option, once more, for the Center.
