Bill Bennett To GOP: Let’s Get To Work (Guest Interview)
So what did Democratic Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential election victory mean, what does it mean to the GOP and what can Republicans do about it? In this Guest Voice interview, columnist Bill Steigerwald asks conservative bigwig Bill Bennett.
Bill Bennett To GOP Let’s Get to Work
by Bill Steigerwald
Conservative author and radio talk-show host Bill Bennett has been a prominent American political and cultural figure since 1981, when he became President Reagan’s chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities and later Secretary of Education. The author of 16 books — including “The Book of Virtues” and his newest, “The American Patriot’s Almanac” — he is host of “Bill Bennett’s Morning in America,” a syndicated talk show that airs from 6 to 9 a.m. weekdays on nearly 200 radio stations and Sirius Patriot Channel 144. I talked to the man The New York Times says is “the leading spokesman of the Traditional Values wing of the Republican Party” on Thursday.
Q: Was Barack Obama’s victory due to his personality or his neo-New Deal ideas?
A: All of the above and more. It was a perfect storm of a campaign for him. He’s a terrifically talented political figure. If politics is a sport, like some others, he’s a natural. He made very few mistakes. Second, his ideas seemed to be right, given the circumstances. And as you probably have noted, it looks like the ideas of free-market capitalism didn’t get a very good airing in the last campaign. John McCain’s a great guy. But he never defended the basic principles of free-market capitalism. He talked about earmarks, but never the rationale for free-market capitalism. … Plus, another part of the storm was the economic collapse of Sept. 15. I’m not sure anybody wins on our side after that.
Q: What did the Obama victory tell you about the Republican Party’s current health and fitness?
A: Well, what it told me is that we haven’t been very good Republicans. I think our principles are fine; I think they need some refocus and much better explanation. One thing that has not been talked about is the “failure to communicate,” as Cool Hand Luke said. George Bush is a terrific guy in a lot of ways, but he’s not a good communicator. The rationale for various things was never really made in a compelling way, whether it be the war or other steps. By the way, contrast that with a first-rate communicator.
These things also often happen in cycles. There’s a kind of schoolyard ethic in America which says it’s somebody else’s turn. Combine that with the final point, which is ironically Ronald Reagan’s teaching — if it happens on your watch, it happened because of you; and are you better off than you were four or eight years ago — and you have the result. I’m kind of pleased that McCain got 46 percent. Given all that was against him, that’s not really so bad. Byron York has written that McCain was flying into head winds. I told Byron at the governors conference (in Miami) that he was flying into a Category 5 hurricane.
Q: You’ve no doubt examined the election results. Obama won mainly in the cities. Do you see in those numbers any problems for Republicans down the road?
A: Yeah, there are problems and challenges, but they’re not insurmountable. We can do this if we’re smart and put our best ideas forward. I keep telling our guys this is not the worst of times for us. This is not Watergate. (Mississippi Gov.) Haley Barbour reminded us in Miami that after Watergate that there was serious discussion as to whether we should drop the name “Republican.” We’re not there (laughs). It’s not that bad (laughs).
Who knows what will happen in the next four years with Barack Obama? It looks like a pretty strong Democrat majority — maybe a filibuster-proof majority, or close to it, in the Senate — and a majority in the House. So they’ll have their way. And when they have their way, there are the laws of physics and the laws of politics and sometime they look the same: There’s reaction and there’s counterreaction. We shall see what they do.
But we have work to do. But I’m not worried about talking to people in the cities. I’m not worried about talking to blacks and Hispanics. There are plenty of good ideas that Republicans have if we just present them. I’m very impressed with the book “The Grand New Party: How Republicans Can Win the Working Class and Save the American Dream” by Ross Douthat and Reihan Salam. We have some good young talent and these are two of the brightest young talents. The book is really quite good. It’s sort of what (Minnesota Gov.) Tim Pawlenty talked about — the Sam’s Club party rather than the country club party.
Q: Do you think conservatism’s core values have been forgotten over the last eight years?
A: Yes. The crazy spending. And again, no defense of these ideas. Tom Wolfe has a great phrase: He talks about the “great relearning.” We need to relearn some of these things we’ve forgotten — about why we believe in freedom, why we believe markets should have the dominance in our economic system. The current circumstances are very scary, because we’ve swallowed a ton of government very quickly and we aren’t digesting it very well. We’ll see, but one thing that may come out of this is a very strong — I’ll say the word again — counterreaction.
Q: What do you think it’s most important for Republicans to stress from now until 2012 — social conservatism and value issues or fiscal issues?
A: Solutions. Pragmatism. Getting the job done. Fixing things. One is encouraged when you’re around the governors: They have real jobs — they’ve got to pick up the garbage and educate the kids.
I think that’s where we go. People are nervous. They’re worried about “losing ground” — Charles Murray’s phrase. They’re worried about their kids not succeeding, not advancing the ball, the next generation not doing as well as the last. And that’s what Republicans need to address. We’re a party that can get things done. We’re not blinded by ideology. We believe in the American dream. We believe in individual enterprise and individual responsibility. That’s an amalgam: That’s partly values, partly business ethic.
Q: Do you think that it is time for some younger conservative Republicans to show up on the scene and carry the ball?
A: Exactly. I actually was calling for all of our guys to step down — (House Minority Leader) John Boehner, (Senate Minority Leader) Mitch McConnell, everybody. I like them both. They’re capable people. But I think the British have a good idea here — when you lose like this, you step out of power. You’re gone and other people step in. I love our bench. I love the Eric Cantors and the Paul Ryans. Some of our governors are terrific. (Louisiana Gov.) Bobby Jindal was on our panel — I had the honor of being on with him. I mentioned Pawlenty. We have a terrific bench. We have great talent up there.
Q: What is the most important step conservatives must take — starting now — to begin their comeback?
A: Well, get their heads up. Darrell Royal, the old football coach (at Texas), said the only time you should look down at your shoes is if you have had an accident. Morale is important. If you believe in these ideas and principles, then act like you do and let’s get to work. We lost the game here. But I think morale is very important. I don’t want to say it’s time to go off in the wilderness, but it’s time to think, and think things through. Prepare your stuff. Some discipline like the Contract with America would be a very good idea, I think.
Bill Steigerwald is a columnist at the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. ©Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, All Rights Reserved. Distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons, Inc.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
16 Responses to “Bill Bennett To GOP: Let’s Get To Work (Guest Interview)”
[...] flying around, and a lot of them center on an argument similar to the one Bill Bennett advances in this interview, that the Republican Party has lost its roots, and needs to find them again. Let me state that I [...]
Yet another conservative who just doesn't really get it. What's his great new idea to solve our current crisis? Do nothing and the markets will take care of it. That was the heart of what he was saying, wasn't it? The same old thing they've been talking about has in fact been done for the last 8 years. While the government spending doesn't their supposed philosophy the deregulation of financial markets certainly does.
Conservatives typically think they lost the election because they were not true to their core values. When they realize a GOP governor like Schwarzenegger is successful because he is flexible— and dumps Republican ideology when it doesn't work for voters- then they will bounce back. Another thing missing- Bennett doesn't mention how the party should broaden its appeal to young people, gays, Muslims, women and minorities. They can't win with just older white Christian males.
i hope the republicans listen and follow everything that bill (i never passed up a meal or a craps table) bennett is saying…they will stay in the minority for a 100 years…and by then, we might get out of the mess that his “free market capitalism” has gotten us into.
that there is this great disconnect between their policies and the absolute chaos they have caused is truly hilarious.
for the fist time in years, the dem won college educated people…thanks to people like bennett and others, constantly putting down “the elite”.
up until the final week of the election, bennett could be heard on his show, pleading with mccain to bring up rev wright….he doesnt want to talk ideas.
cantor is a rising star??? cantor is another republican boob who speaks in talking points.
hey bill…with oil at under 50 dollars a barrell…you still gonna chant “drill, baby, drill” cuz who is gonna do the drilling? wont be the oil companies, who cant and wont spend more to take out than they can sell. when will you guys finally admit that the price of oil had nothing to do with peak oil or the laws of supply and demand, and everything to do with the corrupt speculator market.
i did notice that bill didnt mention palin…wonder why that is?
but ya…push that nutjob jindal to the front of the line
just what america needs…a leader who has named himself after bobby brady and thinks he performed an excorcism in college…that will go over well with the moderates. as will his ties to outsourcing companies to india.
kritt,
Schwarzenegger has been a failure. Massive budget deficits, high unemployment, collapsing public schools and white flight from California all signal that Arnold has been a lousy governor. Of course, Arnold has done nothing differently than what Gray Davis would have done so I guess it makes sense that Democrts would like him more than Republicans.
California has long term problems caused by the standard Democratic policy of giving minorities and the public sector unions exactly what they want. Schwarzenegger has done nothing to correct any of it.
Why anyone would listen to this sanctimonious tool is beyond me – he has no personal morals and certainly no governmental morals.
SD- He is loved by Californians and would have won a bigger share of the electoral vote than McCain.He also is willing to take on industry when it comes to the environment, and is not a social conservative. Americans do not like moral activism- whether it comes from the left or the right.
How is pandering to minorities and the unions any worse than pandering to industrial bigwigs and evangelicals?
kritt,
Califonria has the third highest unemployment rate in the U.S. behind the blue states of Michigan and Rhode Island. How is putting private sector employers out of business a good policy? How is refusing to deal with massive stuctural debt that the state government has incurred. How is creating a state that is unfriendly to the middle class a good thing?
You can ask General Motors, Ford, and Chryler what happens when you pander to unions too much. YOu can ask Detroit what happens when you pander to minorities too much.
Good one, SD. Blame employees for the failure of business “leaders” who missed over 30 years of evidence that they were marketing the wrong mix of products.
Greendreams,
Those same managers were also making long term contract agreements based upon the idea that GM, Ford, and Chrysler would maintain market share and that the market would grow faster than it did. So yes, management was stupid and the unions contracts are a large part of it. To believe that GM could have maintain its union agreemtns and did fine if it produced better cars is unproven. The margins on SUVs was much higher than on compacts. If Detroit would have tried to force everyone to purchase a compact, they would have failed faster. Look at the lot at a Toyota dealer and count the SUVS and trucks.
Bill Bennett and other right-wing mouthpieces clearly think we're stupid.
We didn't vote out the GOP because of they “abandoned their values”. We abandoned the GOP because they failed us. If they want to regain our support, they need to show us success, not failure.
The failures of the Bush Administration and his GOP Congress are legion and well documented elsewhere (heck, nearly EVERYWHERE). Even the most dogmatic among us can look around and see failure after failure after failure. Dogma doesn't put food on the table, success does.
True, many voters go strictly by dogma, and others vote by sheer selfishness (i.e. “can I get special favors by voting for Party X”). But rank-and-file Americans want success and will quickly, and rightly, abandon those who fail.
Obama and the Democrats need to succeed in order to get continued support from us. Right now, it doesn't appear a Democratic Congress can succeed (I don't think Pelosi, Reid, et al have done very well in the past two years).
BarkyBree
If Republicans would have stayed closer to home on being conservatives there would have been much less failure. If they would not have spent so much, the deficit and debt would be much less. If they would not have started new entitlement programs, the government would have caused fewer problems. If they would not have pander so much to black and Hispanics, there would have been more capable people in high positions in the administration and the housing crisis would have been less severe. If they would have reduce regulation instead of passing pointless laws such as Sarbanes-Oxley fewer businesses would have move to other countries. If they would have put every SES in front of Congress and asked hard question and demand real answer, they government would have worked better. If the conservatives really would have been for smaller government, they should have used the power of congress to demonstrate how pointless much of the government really is.
They failed because the conservatives were lazy and became drunk with power. You cannot be a conservative when every crisis requires a bigger federal government.
SD- And what do you think happens to the middle and working classes,and the environment when you pander to industry too much?
Tax breaks have been given to the oil industry, pharmaceutical industry and others and many defense firms were awarded huge no-bid contracts with no oversight. Big Tobacco was allowed to pay a much smaller award than originally negotiated. The banking and investment firms were allowed to follow risky procedures with little or no regulation.
CEO's in the US are payed more proportionately than workers in any other country- and seldom is their pay tied to performance.
As far as the BIg Three- part of the problem IS legacy costs, but a big part is a lack of vision and leadership at the top- an unwillingness to take the companies into the future. The CEO's who clung to a failed strategy should resign without their golden parachutes– and be replaced with innovative leadership.
kritt,
It is the right who keeps proposing a simpler tax code and would like to do away with the social engineering aspects of the tax codes. However, I doubt if the lawyers on the left will ever allow a simplication of the tax code. Look what happens in states like Florida when the state panders to tourism and fails to build other other industries. Also, every few big defense contracts are no-bid (See future combat systems or the new aerila tanks that were bid). Most of the no bids are the famous earmarks.
All the big car companies make small cars. However, they lose money on each car. How could of the President of GM justified giving up the high margins on SUV and trucks to support money losing compacts? Toyota has exanded into big SUV's, big trucks, and sponsoring NASCAR. Yet, no one calls them short sighted.
I think another part of the big three is that immigrants to the U.S. are just ever going to purcahse big three vehicles and the demographic groups who would purchase American cars are shrinking. The companies have invested in electric cars and fuel efficient but physics got in the way.
Reducing regulation is part of the problem. There was no oversight — i.e. regulation — over the financial markets & banking systems, therefore they collapsed. The Bushies basically abandoned their responsibilities, thinking “well, the market will fix it.” Problem is, that's a failed strategy.
Right-wingers say “regulation is bad” as dogma but, as I said, dogma is as worthless as the air over which it is spewed. The key, something that both Republicans and Democrats don't understand, is to have just the right level of regulation to a) protect public safety, and b) ensure trust in the capitalist system. The first bullet is easy, but the second one requires understanding. A capitalist system will ONLY work when it can be trusted to not screw over people. These ludicrous mortgages and incomprehensible securities should never have been allowed to happen, and it was lax regulation and oversight that enabled these things.
The Right and Left have not learned lessons from any of the other non-terrorism related recessions: the Dot-Com burst, the S&L crisis, the Enron debacle, and others. All of those were caused by goofy investments based on whims & prayers, just like the causes of the great crash of 1929.
Deregulation is stupid when carried too far.
And I'm not going to comment on the racist overtones in part of your post.
Barky Bree,
President Bush singed Sarbanes-Oxley so that investors could understand the accounting procedures of businesses. Yet, in 2008, people are screaming that the books of large businesses are not understable and that mark to market is making the situaiton worse.
The Democrats have jumped on the deregulation of the banking system but the first regulation was under President Carter and if it had not happen all of the banks would have failed anyway due to the ability to invest during times of high inflation.
The idea that the government should approve every investment produce and every investment a bank makes is laughable. The government created part of the housing problem by insisiting that banks could not redline and had to loan to minorities at the same rate as whites.
Regulations causes problems and will continue to cause problems. Believing that the government can keep up in a world economy is delusional.