The Crisis of 'Sam's Club' Republicans

[Guest guest]

 

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-salam11jan11,1,7856532.stor\

y?coll=la-news-comment-opinions & ctrack=1 & cset=true COMMENTARYThe Crisis of

'Sam's Club' RepublicansBy Reihan Salam

Reihan Salam writes for the American Scene, a weblog about politics.

 

January 11, 2005

 

Back in 2002, two die-hard social conservatives fought for Minnesota's

Republican gubernatorial nomination. Brian Sullivan was a successful

entrepreneur backed by the Freedom Club, a group of " pro-growth " millionaires

lifted straight from Central Casting. With his zeal for tax cuts and his

privileged background, Sullivan was a Bush Republican down to his wingtips.

 

His opponent was Tim Pawlenty, a state representative born on the wrong side of

the tracks. Pawlenty embraced the state's populist tradition, insisting that

Republicans " need to be the party of Sam's Club, not just the country club. " And

it was Pawlenty who ended up winning the GOP nod and the statehouse by wide

margins.

 

What Pawlenty realized — and what President Bush apparently fails to grasp — is

that the Republican Party has changed. The rich still vote for Republicans in

large numbers, but they're not the party's heart and soul. To win elections, the

GOP increasingly relies on socially conservative voters of modest means.

 

Which is why Bush's second-term agenda is so spectacularly wrongheaded. Social

Security privatization (a good idea whose time hasn't come) and tax cuts for the

rich (cast as " tax reform, " of course) are on the front burner, and an amnesty

for illegal immigrants (which would put even more pressure on native-born

workers without college degrees) isn't far behind. The Freedom Club GOP is

riding high — and the Sam's Club crowd is left in the dust.

 

Consider this from the perspective of a not atypical GOP voter — say, a young

married woman with three small children living in Ohio. She voted for Bush

because he promised to vigorously defend her family against terrorists and

because he shares her values. But she has material interests too. She would like

to raise her kids full time, but the money isn't there. Her husband is working

long hours, but it's not nearly enough, and the tax cuts barely made a dent in

their debts. At some point, she has to wonder, what has President Bush done for

me lately?

 

Precious little is the right answer, and GOP politicians would do well to take

note. Liberals like Thomas Frank, author of " What's the Matter With Kansas, "

have long argued that populist conservatism is nothing more than a con.

Conservatives sell values to the working class, but they deliver economic ruin.

It's a view that is overheated, under-informed and more than a little

condescending. Unfortunately, it contains a grain of truth.

 

This wasn't always the case. In 1980, the federal tax burden was a serious

problem, and slashing taxes for the middle class was genuinely populist because

it was genuinely popular. But after President Reagan closed countless loopholes

and lowered rates and President Clinton shifted the tax burden onto those most

able to pay, the most pressing problems faced by working families weren't

too-high taxes but rather the rising costs of healthcare and of raising

children.

 

Somehow, K Street conservatives — the revolving-door clique of high-powered

lobbyists, congressional staffers, administration officials and think-tank true

believers that defines the Republican agenda — never got the memo. Slashing

taxes and " starving the beast " of government remained the order of the day.

 

As a presidential candidate, George W. Bush challenged this cozy consensus.

Maudlin and focus-grouped though it sounded, " compassionate conservatism " was

more than a marketing gimmick. Or so it seemed.

 

When he got into office, Bush's real first priority turned out to be deep,

across-the-board tax reductions. The second priority was … more deep tax cuts.

As for healthcare, the cost of child-rearing and wage stagnation — issues that

hit close to home for the lower-middle-class strivers — Bush has offered

proposals that were either laughably timid or hugely counterproductive.

 

Take healthcare. In the face of a massive and growing number of uninsured

Americans — and no, they're not all healthy people lackadaisically choosing to

live dangerously — Bush called for " association health plans, " which would, at

best, lead to coverage for 330,000 of the roughly 42 million uninsured. " Let

them eat cake " is the phrase that comes to mind.

 

Chances are that Democrats will miss this opportunity to win over GOP voters

with economic populism that sells. They'll offer child care subsidies for

professional women, but will they stand up for the millions of middle-class

American women who want to be homemakers? Will they subsidize large families,

rewarding parents for sacrificing personal comfort to raise the next generation

of taxpayers? And will they back efforts to curb illegal immigration? Don't hold

your breath.

 

But if Republicans don't shift gears, the Democrats' window of opportunity will

widen, and left-wing populism could take off. When that happens, you won't see

Clintonian micro-initiatives to help the middle class. Not by a long shot.

Job-killing protectionism and overregulation will come roaring back, and so will

stagflation.

 

Politicians are often vilified for pandering to their base, but on matters

economic, the GOP needs to do more of it. By focusing on the interests of Sam's

Club voters, farsighted conservatives can build a lasting majority. But if the

party's agenda continues to be set on K Street, we'll soon be talking about " the

emerging Republican minority. "

 

If you want other stories on this topic, search the Archives at

latimes.com/archives.

 

Article licensing and reprint options

 

 

 

 

 

 

Copyright 2005 Los Angeles Times

var st_v=1.0; var st_pg= " " ; var st_ci= " 703 " ; var st_di= " d001 " ; var

st_dd= " st.sageanalyst.net " ; var st_tai= " v:1.2.1 " ; var st_ai= " " ; if (st_v==1.0) {

var st_uj; var st_dn = (new Date()).getTime(); var st_rf =

escape(document.referrer); st_uj =

" // " +st_dd+ " / " +st_dn+ " /JS?ci= " +st_ci+ " & di= " +st_di+

" & pg= " +st_pg+ " & rf= " +st_rf+ " & jv= " +st_v+ " & tai= " +st_tai+ " & ai= " +st_ai; var iXz =

new Image(); iXz.src = st_uj; }

 

 

 

http://www.freewebs.com/tcfactory/ecosolidarity/freeclick.html

" Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy. Providing

health care to all Americans is socialism. " -- anon

http://www.sharedvoice.org/unamerican/