Ideas for a new movement

August 9, 2007 – 12:22 pm

Patrick Ruffini takes up my challenge to put some meat on the ideological bones. While I agree with most, I would re-emphasize. First, we have a set of broad principles:

  • Win the War on Terror and advance human rights around the world
  • Embrace globalization and economic competitiveness as a way to improve the lives of Americans and others
  • Enhance American economic security, in the context of globalization, with new education, healthcare, and retirement options
  • Renew a faith in American institutions through enhanced openness and transparency.
  • Help parents raise their children in a safer, stronger environment.

Clearly, there will be a slurry of policies to achieve these. But here are some:

  • Foreground human rights in our international relations. This gives us moral high ground and, therefore, a lever over other people. This would include:
    • Raising human rights in China on a high level and at a grassroots level. Also gives us an additional lever to beat them with.
    • Continuing on the President’s Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and expanding to things like the ONE campaign
    • Increasing our public diplomacy massively to communicate this
    • The Union of Democracies, including much stronger relations with India, including as a counter-point to China.
  • Embrace the opportunities of global economic competition:
    • Increase skilled labor immigration to the United States. Probably also need more unskilled labor, but that’s more controversial.
    • Lower the corporate tax rate to be competitive
    • Massively increase skills-based educational opportunities at the state level. Stronger community colleges. Probably increase tax breaks for this kind of stuff.
    • Simplify the tax code. (Probably can’t do a fair tax if you are doing all these tax expenditures. But you might be able to just grant money to do some of these things)
  • Economic security. I think that we have to recognize that protectionism and healthcare concerns are grounded in concerns about economic insecurity. This is important because we need to have a credible economic story to offer the working class. Some ideas:
    • Allow people to buy into large national pools based on some community factor. Unions and corporations have these, but technology and economics are making it inevitable that economic actors come in smaller units. How about other communities like neighborhood associations, churches, professional associations, etc.?
    • Private accounts in retirement
    • Private accounts in education like New America Foundation’s Kids Savings Accounts.
    • Good healthcare deregulation.
  • Faith in American institutions:
    • Ethics reform in Congress
    • Redistricting reform (so voters pick their politicians rather than vice-versa)
    • Open APIs (essentially an updated FOIA)
    • Background checks for Congress (you need them to serve in the administration and handle classified information, but why not Congress? But who actually holds the information?)
  • Helping parents raise kids. Not sure what to put here.

Just some thoughts

Tags: ,

By eye | Comments (6)

Brooks calls for ideas

May 15, 2007 – 8:16 am

David Brooks reminds us of history and calls (Times $elect) for more ideas in the Presidential campaigns. First, the history:

By now, this should sound familiar. And it should be clear that while some Republicans argue that big government conservatism started under George W. Bush and that the G.O.P. was in decent shape until Bush ruined it, this is a total myth. In fact, it was Bush in 1999 who single-handedly (though temporarily) rescued the Republican Party. He did it not by courting Republican interest groups, but by coming up with something new. On July 22, he delivered a speech in Indianapolis in which he explicitly distanced himself from Washington Republicans and laid the groundwork for compassionate conservatism.

This is, to some extent correct. I would argue that Presidential campaigns and candidates redefine a party anyways. However, as Bush pointed out soon after winning the 2000 election, he was shocked that he won in an environment of peace and prosperity.

I think that the right point for Brooks to make is that "compassionate conservatism" was a political innovation that attempted to reshape an image of the GOP. The "old" GOP brand had been shattered by any of a number of things, and Bush found new ideas to build a new brand.

So what are the options today? First, looking at the candidates, Mitt Romney clearly has little to offer other than competence. As a number have pointed out, he is running from his past whether it be his newly minted conservatism, Massachusetts, or his health care plan. Fred Thompson offers a renewed federalism, but is a re-hash of the 30 year old Reagan coalition. Rudy Giuliani and John McCain offer different visions for the future of the party, with, perhaps McCain’s being a little bit more clear. Giuliani offers an enhanced toughness on security (but not foreign policy) and taxes, with no bones for the social conservative part of the coalition. McCain offers old hawkishness with green and anti-corruption measures. It is a new mix.

In any case, Brooks offers an important suggestion for where one or more GOP candidates should go:

Today, Republican candidates should hunger to give that kind of speech, this time with a bigger policy agenda. Republicans should learn from Bush’s false dawn and create a real dawn. What the country needs is a candidate who can transcend current categories and give a speech laying out a human capital agenda, which offers several advantages.

I think that this is probably correct. It is an answer to globalization. Good for reaching some of the new "Reagan Democrats". It is an answer for soccer moms, who are worried about their kids’ educations. And third, it is an answer for business leaders, who are afraid that they will not be able to get good workers.

Isn’t that, in the end, what the Reagan coalition looked like? The coalition wasn’t the issues, it was the people. They had something in common, if you could talk to them. No one is talking to them now. And Bush has so botched Iraq that security probably won’t be a credible message.

Tags: ,

By eye | Comments (1)