Skip to main content

The Responsibility of the Conservative Citizen

In the wake of the Republican Party winning a majority in the House of Representatives, what is the responsibility of the Conservative Citizens who elected them?
Slightly over four years ago, the Republicans began the slide that resulted eventually in the election of a first term Senator from Illinois to the Presidency, along with significant majorities in both chambers. I was making long drives frequently at that time, and remember my violent reactions to whiny-assed Republicans appearing on Sean Hannity's radio program, proclaiming how much worse things would be if we didn't re-elect them.  My reaction was that, since they had failed miserably and completely, they couldn't run on a record of accomplishment.  Instead of making progress on immigration - an issue of importance to conservatives - they had engaged in internecine fights over which proposal was more like amnesty.  Abandoning free market principles, they supported tariffs on Canadian lumber and steel from multiple countries.  And, worst of all, they went on an unbridled spending spree, complete with record-setting earmarks.  I had no  sympathy for their argument that things would be worse.  I'd rather have an honest Liberal than someone who can't be relied upon.
As apposed to many of my conservatives friends, I have no rancor with the President.  In my view, he is exactly as advertised: we new he was a Liberal when we elected him.  Indeed, I think conservatives should be quite surprised that he has prosecuted the war so aggressively.
The remaining Democrats are largely the most Liberal - although not exclusively.
So what is the role now for the Conservative?
It seems to me we must concentrate on watching our own side, and being  relentless in raising hell if they slip back into the patter of 2005.  Things we must monitor:
First, absolutely no earmarks.  (I have great respect for conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt and understand his view that earmarks for the Defense bills are different.  Sorry Hugh, I don't trust them that far yet.)
Second, the deficit is around a trillion dollars.  The currently discussed $100 bil in cuts isn't even a serious effort.    Conservatives should prepare themselves and their representatives for spending reductions of $500 billion.  That means everything must be on the table including conservative favorites: defense, Homeland Security (thanks Jesse Ventura for your expose' on waste there on your new Conspiracy Theory TV show) CIA, FBI.
Third, real work could be done to spur economic growth by dealing with the regulatory bureaucracy.  It takes 20 years to build a nuclear power plant.  Time to exempt nuclear plants from environmental laws and tell the NRC they have 90 days to approve construction plans, or they are automatically approved.  And immediately pass a law excluding carbon dioxide from regulation by the EPA.  Otherwise, the next wave of economic destruction will be released by the EPA.  I believe that massive reduction in the scope of regulatory agencies would be far more stimulative than extending the current tax rates.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Comments

Ed said…
Dude! Just found this. Being the lefty that I am, I should be able to disagree with a lot but so far only your self-description...It says you are middle-aged...not so! You maybe upper-middle-young....but not middle...
Ed said…
Dude! Just found this. Being the lefty that I am, I should be able to disagree with a lot but so far only your self-description...It says you are middle-aged...not so! You maybe upper-middle-young....but not middle...
gene said…
Thanks Ed: But I'm now really not even qualified to call myself middle aged...AARP is after me for a membership...

Popular posts from this blog

Book Review: What Matters Now by Gary Hamel

Interview of Eric Schmidt by Gary Hamel at the MLab dinner tonight. Google's Marissa Mayer and Hal Varian also joined the open dialog about Google's culture and management style, from chaos to arrogance. The video just went up on YouTube. It's quite entertaining. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)Cover of The Future of ManagementMy list of must-read business writers continues to expand.Gary Hamel, however, author of What Matters Now, with the very long subtitle of How to Win in a World of Relentless Change, Ferocious Competition, and Unstoppable Innovation, has been on the list for quite some time.Continuing his thesis on the need for a new approach to management introduced in his prior book The Future of Management, Hamel calls for a complete rethinking of how enterprises are run.

Fundamental to his recommendation is that the practice of management is ossified in a command and control system that is now generations old and needs to be replaced with something that reflects an educat…

Book Review- Stretch by Scott Sonenshein

Have you ever watched, or been involved in, a business failure, where, despite the best efforts of hardworking people, the business doesn’t survive? Scott Sonenshein lived through it, as he describes in the Introduction to his engrossing book Stretch.  (In some books, the reader can skip the intro- not this one; the introduction is a must-read part of the book.) He was hired by start-up Vividence in Silicon Valley at the very apex of the tech boom.  Despite prestige VC backers, top-tier hires and $50 million, Vividence didn’t make it. As his career continued, that experience led to an interest in why some well-funded operations don’t succeed, while other, more resource constrained, do. Peter Senge wrote about reinforcing cycles as part of his book The Fifth Discipline, which I consider one of the finest business books ever penned. In it, Senge describes the downward cycle that some companies fall into, and why it is so difficult to reverse. Sonenshein explores those cycles from diffe…

Tax Inversions

A savvy businessman once told me “it’s important to know what problem you are trying to solve”.
Let’s ignore for the moment whether or not Treasury or the IRS had the power to change the rules on so-called tax inversions without Congressional action. (The power they said they didn’t have only a few months ago.)
Rather, let’s focus on what problem we are trying to solve. That is, why is the greatest country on earth chasing companies away? Shouldn’t the U.S. be the place that companies want to locate their headquarters?
Imagine this: the U.S. legal structure and tax regime was so attractive that Mercedes, Toyota, Astra Zeneca, Samsung, Total, Singapore Air, Banco Santander, Petrobras, Fujitsu, Nokia, SAP, Audi, Tata Group, Lenovo, Pirelli, Deutsche Bank, Honda, LG, Hyundai, Roche, Credit Suisse, Four Seasons, Siemens, Phillips, Bridgestone, Anglo-America, DeBeers, Volkswagen, Canon,  L’OrĂ©al, Swatch, Armani, LVMH, Toshiba, H&M, Mahindra, Aldi, Kubota, Onex, Ducati, Pemex, Saudi-Ara…