IF YOU CAN'T BEAT 'EM...
Making Common Cause With Progressive Conservatives
Serves Liberal Ends Better Than Sour Grapes
Opposition
by Heather and Benjamin Grizzle
In 1902, Theodore Roosevelt became the last Republican president--until George W. Bush in 2002--to gain legislative seats in his midterm election. In 1904, Roosevelt won reelection by the widest margin in US presidential history to that point. Just eight years later Roosevelt ended up running against his own party because its leader, President William H. Taft, had so betrayed Roosevelt's progressive principles. It took GOP fifty years to recover.
What is the lesson all this holds at the start of 2005? The lesson is the same for both George W. Bush and his neo-cons and for liberals as well - make common cause with Republican progressives.
In the aftermath of the GOP's decisive victory this fall, both conservatives and liberals forget that while the two parties disagree about means, "progressive" ends like greater opportunity for immigrants, minorities, and the poor, a cleaner sustainable environment, and responsibility among the capable, remain a vision for many in both parties.
If liberal progressives would learn not just to "speak conservative" - transparent rhetorical tweaking will backfire - but also to thoughtfully understand and make common cause with conservative progressives, a GOP administration could be steered toward its best progressive instincts, rather than cast off to its worst elements.
In the pre-war election of 2000, and again in 2004, a significant majority of the poorest counties in the nation voted for Bush, while a similar proportion of the wealthiest counties voted for Gore, illustrating a socioeconomic realignment of the two-party system. The GOP was for many years the party of the wealthy, the Democrats of the working class. No longer. It should be a wake-up call to the left that the often-ignored rural poor no longer trust the liberal vision for their future.
If many of the poor don't like hand-outs from one-size-fits-all anonymous government programs, but all those wealthy blue staters want to give more, we progressives should work with conservatives to make private sector NGOs, faith-based organizations and community groups succeed, thereby improving the lot of the poor - a progressive end - but via the conservative means of locally "owned" and operated organizations.
This fall's election also saw the growth of the GOP's multi-generational black vote and the Latino vote. Immigrant voters were increasingly indistinguishable from the broader population. Progressives should be encouraged that those once on the margins of society have joined the political mainstream. Progressives should be encouraged that Bush, in his first term, put minorities in charge of all of his leading international and domestic agendas - national security, international diplomacy, education, not just talking about empowering minorities, but also putting them in positions of real authority.
Looking ahead, progressives should get behind Bush's controversial plan for legitimizing many now illegal workers and resident aliens. Bush, like TR, faces staunch resistance from within his own party on immigration issues, and progressives face a choice on whether they will stubbornly oppose the man who has presided over the left's political marginalization, or whether--in the name of progressive principles--they will abandon their partisanship and support a viable plan to help vulnerable would-be Americans.
Progressives should also do a better job of winning over sympathetic conservative groups that are already mobilized, for example hunters and other pro-gun groups. Hunters give more money than any other demographic group of private individuals to protect habitat and fund environmental research. Why has the NRA been more effective marshalling this committed group of environmentalists than has the left? Those camo-wearing, gun-toting hunters are not too far on the other side that we can't reach across the chasm and join forces. And these aren't the only prime, already mobilized conservatives that could be recruited to progressive causes if the left would show them the dignity of respecting their values and way of life.
In an environment where conservatives call the shots, the left must better recognize the utility of "conservative" policy tools like competition to achieve progressive ends. Perhaps the poor would be helped by raising their income, but competition can and does lower the expense side of working families' cash flow statement. For all there is to criticize about Wal-Mart, the superstore demonstrates the way competition improves the lives of citizens by making working families' dollars stretch, even if it's hardly a model of generous compensation.
If the Republicans now fail to lead the nation in a balanced fashion, they will be punished - with such unfettered control of the federal (and most states') government, the GOP has no mobilized opposition to blame anymore. More importantly though, there are progressive - if not liberal - elements within the GOP that can and should flourish if similarly inclined people on the left side irrigate the efforts of progressive conservatives rather than starving them out just for having a W sticker on their bumper. Rank partisanship undermines the real goal of political discourse, which is progress for all Americans.
# # #
Benjamin Grizzle works with foreign currency sales & trading at Goldman Sachs and Heather Grizzle works as deputy communications director for the Doug Forrester for NJ Governor campaign. They are self-described progressive Republicans and live in Manhattan. Their emails are: Benjamin.Grizzle@gs.com and heatherannegrizzle@yahoo.com .