The Wall Street Journal-20080129-Which Direction Is Right
Return to: The_Wall_Street_Journal-20080129
Which Direction Is Right
Full Text (935 words)Comeback
By David Frum
(Doubleday, 213 pages, $29.95)
The Republican primaries, so far, have sent mixed messages about the future of American conservatism, assuming that the GOP is its natural home. John McCain seems to be the Republican front-runner, but in many respects (not least campaign-finance reform) he is far from a traditional conservative. Fred Thompson was the candidate who sounded the most Reaganesque, and he has dropped out of the race. Mitt Romney, a moderate Republican governor in Massachusetts, has put forth conservative ideas yet focuses more on his ability to govern. Mike Huckabee, in many respects, has sounded more populist than conservative. As for Rudolph Giuliani, he can certainly sound very conservative -- when we hear him -- but he doesn't exactly fit the mold of a traditional conservative in his personal life or social views.
There is a reason for this confusion. In "Comeback: Conservatism That Can Win Again," David Frum laments the fate of conservative principle in recent years, especially when Republicans were fully governing "for the first time in half a century," controlling both houses of Congress and the presidency. Instead of rolling government back, they "hugely expanded it." He notes, among much else, a "backsliding toward trade protectionism," the preservation of all sorts of price-raising tariffs, the onerous Sarbanes-Oxley bill ("a wild overreaction" to private-sector accounting scandals), the "costliest farm bill in history," the vacuous campaign-finance reform, the Justice Department's support of racial preferences and, of course, Medicare's huge new prescription-drug benefit.
With Jack Abramoff and others, Mr. Frum says, the Republican Party became an emblem of corruption rather than ethics; with Hurricane Katrina, it became the party of incompetence, too. Congressional Republicans, he believes, lost their majority when their raison d'etre was no longer to pass conservative legislation but rather to further the narrow interests of Republican politicians and their allies in Washington.
What to do? Mr. Frum would like to see a return to the key elements of a winning conservative coalition -- an emphasis on free-market economics and property rights, the rule of law, a social policy built on traditional values, and a strong national defense (which would mean, in part, honoring the tough pledges of President Bush's 2002 State of the Union address, especially when it comes to North Korea and Iran). But Mr. Frum also argues that the country has shifted since the iconic Reagan years, and conservative policies must shift too.
Polls suggest that many Americans do not feel as strongly about, say, stem-cell research or Terri Schiavo-like deathbed decisions as traditionalist conservatives do. In the Schiavo case in particular, Mr. Frum says, conservatives moved the debate away from the rule of law, making their arguments less compelling. When it comes to abortion, divorce and other culture-war battles, he notes, conservatives have had some success in the culture at large. But to "come back" politically, they must avoid sounding merely judgmental; they must put forward practical policies that lift up families, children and communities.
Similarly, Mr. Frum feels that further tax cuts, a perennial conservative hope, would be of limited value -- and, in any case, would have to be balanced by tax increases. He argues at length for a consumption tax (and for removing the contribution and withdrawal limits on IRAs). He is especially keen on Republicans taking up the environmental cause, not by asking the federal government to act as an "investment banker" among competing technologies but by taxing "those forms of energy that present political and environmental risks." Such a tax, he says, "would fall heavily on oil, natural gas, and polluting coal." It would exempt "hydropower, solar, wind, geothermal, and nuclear altogether." What he has in mind, he admits, "would look exactly like the carbon tax advocated by global-warming crusaders."
Clearly Mr. Frum is attempting to do more than restore conservatism; he also hopes to redefine it. The environmental plank in his platform, for instance, might reassert the traditionalist "conservation" part of conservatism, but it is also aimed at acknowledging the "spiritual," symbolic importance of the environment to more and more voters. Similarly, he notes that voters are more and more unhappy about their health-care costs. Conservatives thus must do something more, he says, than say "no" to government initiatives if they are to avert "a big, Canadian-style government health care monopoly." He even advocates a national advertising campaign warning about the dangers of obesity.
When it comes to foreign policy Mr. Frum is less inclined to such hybrid positions. Our current policy, he says, is rife with internal contradictions -- while declaring a global war on terror, Mr. Bush defined the threat for the American public as if it were coming from a small number of extremists. With respect to Iran, Mr. Bush spoke loudly and wielded a small stick, failing to take meaningful steps to slow its acquisition of nuclear weapons.
In both cases -- and even more so in domestic matters -- the most damaging result of the Republican ascendancy, in Mr. Frum's view, has been a breach of faith with the American people. Republicans have appealed to the conservative instincts of a majority of Americans but then, when given power, failed to govern according to conservative principles.
Whatever the merits of Mr. Frum's various prescriptions, "Comeback" should be required reading for all GOP candidates. A bumper sticker seen around Washington these days reads: "1.21.2009." That's the first day of the next presidency -- and what is at stake if the GOP does not become again the party of conservative ideas.
---
Mr. McIntosh, a former congressman from Indiana's second district, is a lawyer in Washington.
