Moderate Republicans Reject Social Conservativism, Call For Restoration of Checks and Balances

Groups of moderate Republicans have issued a statement of principles which I have found via Central Sanity and Michael P.F. van der Galiën. This return to rule of law and move away from the authoritarianism of the current Republican leadership is what is necessary if the Republicans are to hope to be anything more than a southern regional party in the future. All in all, it isn’t even terribly inconsistent with the views I recently expressed in The Meaning of Liberalism. A Republican Party governed by these principles would help end the gridlock, allowing liberals and moderate conservatives to work together for the improvement of the country without being distracted by the wedge issues pushed by the current Republican leadership.

The authors acknowledge that “narrow-minded strategies of certain social conservatives have made our Party a shadow of its former self.” They “reject these social conservatives’ alienating approach and prefer what former U.S. Senator John Danforth has labeled a politics of ‘reconciliation.”

Besides rejecting the extremes of social conservatives, they call for a restoration of the checks and balances on government which have been eroded in recent years. While I welcome this view, I wish they had also included restoration of the separation of church and state when turning to the vision of the founding fathers:

We believe in the U.S. Constitution, its checks and balances, and importantly, the protections it affords our states and citizens. We further believe those protections should be consistently applied, both in times of war and of peace. The war on terror should not be a war on habeas corpus

Their support for personal liberty goes much further than the rhetoric of the far right:

We believe in maximizing personal liberty and minimizing government interference in our private lives, including the lives of pregnant women, terminally ill patients, gays, lesbians, and all other categories of responsible, law-abiding adults.

Just as the above appears to support abortion rights without using the word, they also support stem cell research without use of the term:

We further believe that the truest pro-life position is one which allows and encourages the ethical pursuit of all scientific research that holds promise for mitigating diseases that afflict our families and friends.

The full text of their letter is below the fold:

We, the undersigned, are Republicans.

Through separate but cooperative organizations – from the Republican Leadership Council to the Republican Main Street Partnership; from Republicans for Environmental Protection to the Log Cabin Republicans and Republicans for Choice – we are a growing force within the Party.

Republican candidates will need to increasingly reckon with us in the months and years ahead, as we organize and mobilize for no purpose less dramatic than the rescue of our Party and the refocusing of its platform on the bedrock principles of individual liberty and limited government; lower taxes and free markets; a strong national defense and collaborative foreign policy.

We intend this letter as an encouragement to GOP leaders who (a) embrace those bedrock principles but recognize that the narrow-minded strategies of certain social conservatives have made our Party a shadow of its former self, and (b) thus reject these social conservatives’ alienating approach and prefer what former U.S. Senator John Danforth has labeled a politics of “reconciliation,” a politics wherein we seek to emphasize what unites rather than what divides us. If you fit in this category, we encourage you to speak up and boldly state your beliefs, without equivocation. And if certain social conservatives attack you for doing so, we – the real Republican base – will be there to lend our support.

We believe the wise use of taxpayer dollars requires our government to avoid deficits and the enormous and unnecessary burden those deficits will place on future generations.

We believe in personal responsibility, self-reliance, capitalism, and the power of markets – markets that are allowed to operate with the least possible degree of regulation that is necessary to safeguard fair play and equal opportunity.

We believe in prudent actions that advance our national security, grounded in a foreign policy that, quoting former New Jersey Governor Christine Todd Whitman, is “premised on the understanding that the rest of the world matters to us,” and that thus we should guard “against becoming ensnared in nation-building enterprises and push for policies that engage us with the world community and show, in the words of the Declaration of Independence, ‘a decent respect to the opinions of mankind.’”

We believe in the U.S. Constitution, its checks and balances, and importantly, the protections it affords our states and citizens. We further believe those protections should be consistently applied, both in times of war and of peace. The war on terror should not be a war on habeas corpus.

We believe in maximizing personal liberty and minimizing government interference in our private lives, including the lives of pregnant women, terminally ill patients, gays, lesbians, and all other categories of responsible, law-abiding adults. Again quoting Governor Whitman: “The defining feature of the conservative viewpoint is a faith in the ability, and a respect for the right, of individuals to make their own decisions – economic, social, and spiritual – about their lives. The true conservative understands that government’s track record in respecting individual rights is poor when it dictates individual choices. Accordingly, the conservative desires to limit government’s reach as much as possible. Traditional conservatives adhere to the maxim, often attributed to Thomas Jefferson, that government governs best that governs least.”

We further believe that the truest pro-life position is one which allows and encourages the ethical pursuit of all scientific research that holds promise for mitigating diseases that afflict our families and friends.

We believe the education of our young people is critical to our future as a nation and that realistic, fiscally conservative policies should be developed to further advance educational standards, opportunities, and access, from the lowest grades to the highest, from kindergarten through college.

We believe in reasonable policies that will advance the health of our citizens, with an emphasis on children, seniors, and others who are truly in need and cannot otherwise afford health care.

We also believe in reasonable policies that will advance the health of our environment, with careful attention paid to protecting our economic vitality and objective analyses of the pro’s and con’s of alternative energy sources.

In summary, we embrace what management guru Jim Collins – in his bestselling book Built to Last – called the “Genius of the AND.” We believe the GOP and its members can and should be simultaneously pro-choice and pro-life; pro-environment and pro-economy; pro-family and pro-liberty; pro-budget and pro-opportunity; pro-security and pro-Constitution. These beliefs need not be contradictory nor exclusive.

If you are or know an incumbent or prospective Republican candidate who shares these beliefs and who wants the larger GOP to stand united behind them, we encourage you to let us know, so that we can add you or your candidate to our roster of those we will support with our votes, voices, volunteers, and dollars.

4 Comments

  1. 1
    Michael van der Galien says:

    I’m obviously not American, but if I were I would sign this letter, even though I’m more conservative than Pete is. It seems to me, that it is necessary for Republicans who do not belong to the Religious Right to reclaim their party. Whether they’re moderates or traditional conservatives (or libertarians), they should make clear that the politics of division have ruled for too long.

    At least, that’s how I see it…

  2. 2
    Pete Abel says:

    Ron,

    Thanks for the comments and for highlighting the initiative.

    Pete A.

  3. 3
    Pete Abel says:

    Oh, and one other point: The letter has not yet been distributed; it is still a draft, albeit what I hope is a final (or close-to-final) draft, pending input from some of the leading moderate Republican groups. See my update post here:

    Link 

  4. 4
    Pete Abel says:

    Please note that I have removed the previously listed Republican organizations from the draft letter until they have an opportunity to determine their interest in being associated with it: http://centralsanity.blogspot.com/2007/06/revised-letter-to-republican-leaders.html

2 Trackbacks

Leave a comment