OP-ED | Wanted: An Opposition Party
by Susan Bigelow | Jul 1, 2011 10:47am
(12) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Opinion
I’m on Twitter a lot late at night, and I was there when the Courant’s Capitol Watch account tweeted that Larry Cafero was giving a “Morning in Connecticut” speech as the new fiscal year arrived. He was, apparently, channeling Ronald Reagan.
I rolled my eyes. Reagan again. This, I thought, is one of so, so many problems with modern Republicans: they constantly look backwards to a past that never quite existed, instead of forward.
Republican big ideas are similarly stuck in the past, and that’s another problem. The stubborn belief that a huge deficit can be fixed with spending cuts alone is just as silly as the trope on the opposite side that raising taxes on the rich is the magic bullet. In fact, Republican economic and fiscal ideas haven’t evolved since Reagan’s 1980 campaign: cut spending, lower taxes on the rich, fire public employees, loosen regulations, make government smaller, and somehow everything will work out just fine. It doesn’t work, of course. It’s nonsense. If this kind of thing really did work we’d be swimming in prosperity right now instead of suffering through yet another economic slowdown. They cling to it anyway.
Come on. Give me something new.
Connecticut Republicans, I noticed that your party elected a new chairman this week. Good for you! The old chair wasn’t cutting it anymore; all he seemed capable of doing was getting his party’s relatively small base riled up, getting on TV and lobbing verbal bombs at Democrats and the media. The Republicans in general seem to have become an awful lot meaner and more pessimistic lately. Nobody wants anything to do with a party that does nothing but sneer and predict doom; that’s the sort of nonsense Republicans did in the 1930s and mid-1960s, and look how well that turned out. The past can be instructive, sometimes, too, if we’re willing to learn from it.
What about this new guy? Jerry Labriola Jr. made a couple of clever ads referencing Internet memes during a quixotic run at Rosa DeLauro, and otherwise seems like a nice guy. He emailed supporters the day after his election calling for unity and striking a more optimistic and level tone than the caustic, snarky Chris Healy. That’s not bad for a start.
Another thing the new chair needs to do is ditch the idea that getting more conservative will somehow make the party more appealing to voters. Yes, turning right excites the base. But we saw the limits of that in 2010. While the Republicans pushed up turnout and picked up a handful of legislative seats, they fell well short of what they might have accomplished. Case in point: if the Republicans had nominated the moderate Lt. Gov. Michael Fedele instead of Greenwich businessman Tom Foley, they would likely have kept the governor’s mansion.
Look, it’s simple. Parties consistently win when they convince independent and moderate voters to take a chance on them. This has always, always been true. John Rowland did it, and so did Jodi Rell. Pumping up the base with the kinds of horrible attacks, fear-mongering, and outright lying pundits like to call “red meat” can work sometimes, but when the base is vastly outnumbered it’s not a great recipe for success. Why should moderate independents and conservative Democrats take a chance on the Connecticut GOP right now, when they seem to be becoming more and more like the national Republican Party? Republicans need to find their way to the center, pronto, or they’ll continue to be irrelevant.
Why do I care? Here’s why. This has been a lousy week. It started with massive layoffs in the state workforce and finger-pointing among rival Democratic factions, and it looks like it has ended with the governor getting broad budget-cutting powers (at least temporarily) and even more layoffs. Collective bargaining reforms passed the Senate, though the House hasn’t taken them up. It’s the kind of week that rattles everyone. Through it all I’ve been wondering if Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has finally gone off the rails entirely, and what the end result might be once the special session ends. In the background, following the disastrous rejection of the concession deal that sparked this week’s mess, the state employee unions seem paralyzed and broken.
So of course, the Republicans give us Reagan. I’ve found more than one blog wondering which GOP chair candidate Reagan would support, for instance. I’m not even surprised. But Connecticut doesn’t need Reagan. We need something new, we need ideas that are for now instead of 30 years ago. We need a real way forward that isn’t just pro-business or pro-worker, but pro-Connecticut.
The Democrats who have held the legislature for most of a generation are floundering trying to come up with one. If they can’t, we’re going to need a viable alternative.
So come on, Republicans. We’re waiting.
Susan Bigelow is the former owner of CTLocalPolitics. She lives in Enfield with her wife and cats.
Tags: Ronald Reagan, Republican, republican, labor, Malloy, budget
(12) Comments
posted by: Dimitar Naydenov | July 3, 2011 7:47am
Your op-ed reminds me of the median voter theorem. I think you are right. Usually in order to win elections a candidate should be appealing not just to his or her party base but also to the voters in the middle of the political spectrum who are usually at least a plurality of the registered voters (the independents and the voters from the other party some of whose views are not in accordance with that party’s views - you gave a good example with conservative Democrats).
posted by: GoatBoyPHD | July 3, 2011 9:22am
What the GOP and Democrats should have learned from Reagan.
1) Deficits work but aren’t sustainable.
2) Buy American programs work. Lehman’s 600-ship Navy and other arms procurement programs did wonders for the CT and national economy as it covered a wealth of industries from ore mining, to steel making, to advanced electronics and software. Much of it was labor intensive. Nearly all was domestic.
3) Real Estate and construction incentives work. Hartford was the 1989 poster child of Real Estate Carter-era bust to Reagan boom to Bush bust.
D) Capital gains cuts, easy credit, and deregulation create a favorable atmosphere for small business formation.
posted by: Edward | July 3, 2011 10:11am
Is there any evidence Fedele would have beaten Malloy? If anything he might have done worse than Foley given that Fedele took public financing and had the weight of the Rell administration with him.
While I agree with parts of your critique of Republicans nationally and in CT, your generic advice isn’t going to serve the party well. “Move to the center” is a constant refrain often used to berate the GOP by people who don’t generally like Republicans anyway. Simply “moderating” is poor advice that has already failed CT Republicans. Rell was the most centrist Republican governor in the country and yet during her tenure the state party collapsed.
What’s needed desperately are Republicans willing to put in the time, energy and money to rebuilding the party infrastructure. It’s not so much about ideology as it is about organization and support. If Republicans can put forward a wave of well financed, well organized candidates who have a consistent and clear message then they will start to come back.
Yes, Republicans need to update their domestic policy playbook. In the meantime, simply washing down their brand in the hopes that some in the pundit class will find them “sensible” isn’t going to win elections.
posted by: Disgruntled | July 3, 2011 10:39am
Ronald Regan was a goofy front for a criminal cabal that succeeded in mutating every morning in America.
Mr. Fedeli did not get nominated partly because he was a nice,pleasant idiot who did not have the brain power to address the issues of the day. Foley might have been a good choice but he did not want to work hard to get elected.Dan screamed (and bought?) his way into office but even the folks in the city he was at the helm of for thirteen years were happy to get rid of him! Sound familiar state workers?
Connecticut lacks leadership. It is a tiny state with history and large corporate influence and,for its size,horribly corrupt politicians.
You are looking for one party to change and become an alternative? I contend that both parties have morphed into pretty much the same thing that has led us to the current state of affairs. We now have to pick and choose(few voters bother) as best we can between the two parties and hope that a savior emerges from the resulting stew. Hardly an effective method of government and probably insures that we will be staying the course (as Ronnie like to say) in Connecticut.
posted by: hawkeye | July 3, 2011 11:36am
Susan Bigelow: You made a story out of Larry Cafero and Ronald Reagan—- but why are you putting the heat on the minority state-elected Republicans, when they have no power to do anything, and have been excluded from the Gov. D. P. Malloy, Democratic General Assembly state-controlled budget process?
You reflect a solid pro-Democratic favoratism-theme in your writings.
posted by: Susan Jane Bigelow | July 3, 2011 12:24pm
Edward—If you take a look I’m actually hoping for some new ideas and a real way forward from them, not just “watering down” the GOP brand. It’s more than just “move to the center.”
posted by: billhosley | July 3, 2011 12:53pm
I heartily agree that “we need a real way forward that isn’t just pro-business or pro-worker, but pro-Connecticut.” You’re correct that CT GOP must articulate a coherent and compelling strategy and vision for CT. Given the circumstances, it shouldn’t be hard.
I believe we are witnessing a once-in-a-generation clash between two different philosophies of economic growth - the Keynsian idea that deficit spending and fiscal stimulus get the economy rolling and Friedrich Hayek’s emphasis on trade and the free movement of capital.
The tipping point is now! When government spending as a percent of GDP (gross domestic product) was 20% (as it was through the 1st 3rd of the 20th century, with the exception of a couple years during WWI) and even 30%+/- as it was from about 1955-1980 – things perked along. But at 40% as it is presently – everything starts to fail. We have reached a tipping point where the economy is faltering under the weight of government spending and taxation - where job growth is anemic, businesses are bolting for the exits and a growing sense of injustice prevails, not only between those in the private sector, but also a generational conflict between veteran public sector employees and the “last ins” who will bear the brunt of inevitable layoffs.
This is not about taxing the rich or demonizing the public sector – but basic justice and common sense. Unless and until balance and equilibrium is restored between private and public sector economies – conflict is inevitable. Anyone in government who talks about creating jobs without acknowledging this is a phony.
The GOP needs strong leaders without baggage who’ll stand up for Connecticut and do what’s needed to not only to right-size the government burden, but to make Connecticut more competitive in a global economy.
As a kid growing up in Rochester, NY I recall a traumatic civic milestone when home-grown Xerox Corporation relocated its corporate headquarters to Connecticut where (we were told repeatedly) “they don’t pay income tax.” The idea was that Connecticut was a more competitive business climate. That WAS Connecticut’s repudiation and image. “Yankee ingenuity” (and “more patents per capita than any state”) WAS Connecticut’s image. It made this the richest state in the nation.
That was then, this is now. If we want Connecticut to be attractive to a rising generation, we need to get back in shape, we certainly need a vigorous two-party system and we absolutely need to right-size the public sector and dial back on some of the it’s unnecessary incursions into too many facets of our lives and economies.
The next round is the GOP’s to loose. The pendulum swings leave us no choice but to lighten the load and embrace a Hayekian emphasis on free trade and the private sector economy – while there is enough of one left to keep this ship floating.
Bill Hosley
Enfield, CT
posted by: wmwallace | July 3, 2011 2:49pm
Right now we are dealing with the largest tax increase ever with unemployment over 9%. You talk about we need new republican idea’s and that Reagan’s solutions are thirty years ago. When in fact his principles of cutting taxes and giving the people more of their monies they earned. Which helped our economy. Remember in seven years Reagan help create almost 20 million jobs.
So please don’t dismiss success from the past because it doesn’t fit your view of the world. If anything we should do as Reagan did and not what Malloy and the democrats in Hartford did. I want to go back to the Reagan years and common sense approach on the budget and taxes.
posted by: ctperson13 | July 4, 2011 8:29am
I agree with Susan on one point—we need better choices from the Republican party. And the Dems, for that matter. I am sick of making the choice between the “lesser of two evils.” During the recent gubernatorial election, I knew that I did NOT want to vote for Malloy. My research told me he’d be bad for the state. My only alternative, if I didn’t want to throw away my vote on someone who didn’t have a chance of winning, was Foley. Did I think he’d be a good governor? No. Did I think he’d be a better governor than Malloy? Yes. But I shouldn’t have to choose between two evils. For one thing, let’s try to nominate someone who isn’t already a millionare, and therefore more likely to continue the support of public subsidies and tax loopholes for the uber-wealthy. People tend to look out for their own interests and the interests of those most like them. The MAJORITY of CT citizens are not hugely wealthy. Many are, but not the majority. Money talks—thus the huge increase in the gap between the uber-wealthy and the rest of us over the past 3 decades. The wealthy don’t need any more representation in government—they’ve bought and paid for plenty. Democrats and Republicans both. The Dems are no better with their continual shifting of money into safety net systems (Welfare, Food Stamps) that are continually abused due to inept oversight. And/or due to a desire to keep this population on their sides so that they continue to vote for them. And Malloy with his despicable relationship to the unions. Come on, do we really believe that the Route 11 project, the New Britain-Hartford busline, and the UConn Health Center expansion are projects that will benefit the majority of us? The Health Center has required millions in public subsidies over the past 10 years or so. It will supply union jobs during construction, and then a few more overpaid, bloated salary positions (most likely from out of state)many years down the line—IF it all pans out the way the gov says it will. The REAL reason we are all paying close to a billion dollars more out of our OWN pockets for this project? Payback for the unions, and payback for the bloated stuffed shirts at UConn. Susan Herbst, new UConn pres.—$500K per year. More than the freaking president of the UNITED STATES! Chief of police at UConn making more than $250K, more than the chiefs in NYC and Boston! Laurencin, the doc who just stepped down as vp of the Health Center—making between $600 and $900K, depending on the source. The reports of Aetna being paid outrageous sums of money for land in connection with the busway project. Come on, who is Malloy really trying to benefit here?
Yes, we need better choices. And those choices need to include (from BOTH PARTIES) folks who are really looking out for the best intersts of the MAJORITY of the population, and not the super-wealthy, the large corporations, the safety-net bottom feeders or the union fat-cats (who have recently, it appears, tried to sell out their own membership to further their own agendas). It’s sickening.
posted by: Disgruntled | July 4, 2011 6:00pm
Connecticut needs a leader who is homegrown and wants to stay in Connecticut.
People like Malloy or Dodd or Felon-Rowland who are/were looking at the top spot as a stepping stone to higher office is NOT what this state needs.
Party affiliation is not important as long as the leader knows the needs of the state. Bringing up the myth of Regan,and not the reality,plays the same old game. Ronnie spent more,created more debt,did nothing on an international level but claimed success over the former Soviet Union that collapsed on its own. Ronnie was at the helm when more American soldiers died at one time and DID NOTHING but talk tough. The fact is that he was sitting on an economy that was improving on its own and he trickled down on the masses who somehow were led to believe that he was the cause of their good fortune while at the same time lining the pockets of his supporters.All myth! It worked for him in California and it worked for him in DC but Ronald Reagan was a CLOWN!
Reagan,Bush and The Mafia was an eye-opener,many years ago,that got little press. Read it. THAT is your primer on Reaganomics!
Again. Connecticut is a state the size of a postage stamp that needs homegrown leaders who want to STAY at home and watch the Nutmeg State prosper.Like a garden,sometimes smaller can be more productive but Connecticut happens to be a bit crowded with weeds and pests at the nonce.
posted by: wmwallace | July 5, 2011 2:45am
What is needed is the people seeing what happens when the democrats have complete control of Hartford. They can’t blame it on the governor any longer. The last budget was on them completely but yet they blamed the governor. Now who will they blame.
The problem isn’t the republican party “though it needed some new blood”. It is the democrats never being responsible for their actions. Well now it is all on them.
@disgruntled Reagan was a great president and turned this country around. Just look at the economy when Cater was president and when Reagan left office. History tells the truth unlike some on here.
posted by: gumshoe | July 5, 2011 9:29am
I’ve just started reading CT News Junkie and I enjoy the tone and content. I’m a life-long Republican and yes indeed, “Come on. Give me something new.” I hear the same people spouting the same opinions and nothing new comes of it. In fact, we’re regressing if the state and federal debt levels are indicators.
If Gov. Malloy follows through with the layoffs, he’ll have earned my vote for a 2nd term. I don’t agree with all the moves but the governor is governing and I find that a refreshing change.