Bull Moose progressivism -- the reform politics of Teddy Roosevelt in
the 1912 election -- has been mostly absent from American politics for
decades. But the Moose has been sighted recently, roaming the political
plains, and both the Democrats and Republicans had better pay attention.
The Moose is a new force, a synthesis of the best of progressivism and
conservatism.
The two parties, however, seem oblivious to the loose Moose since they
are focused solely on appeasing their respective bases with either more
tax cuts or more government spending. The Democrats say, "It's your
entitlement." The Republicans say, "It's your money." This
is a reverse JFK: "Ask not what you can do for your country, but
rather what your country can do for your stock portfolio/benefit package."
In contrast, the Bull Moose represents a politics of reform and reciprocity.
Inspired by old T.R. himself and updated for the 21st century, the new
progressivism advocates reform of the campaign finance system, entitlements,
the tax code, and the budget process.
Remember the 1912 campaign. Then, former President Teddy Roosevelt challenged
the Republican and Democratic Party establishments in a third party run.
Although he was unsuccessful, the incumbent finished third and many of
T.R's ideas were eventually incorporated into the New Deal.
But in the Republican Party, progressivism has been dormant for many
years. The party's orthodox conservatism has become ever more exhausted,
as demonstrated by the appeal of John McCain's insurgent candidacy in
2000. McCain's message of political reform, patriotism, and an economics
of the middle class struck a chord. It resonated with the most dynamic
force on the political scene, the rise of the independents.
Yet the animating feature of modern Republicanism is reducing the top
marginal tax rate and eliminating the inheritance tax. The recently enacted
tax cut contains a puny growth component, drains vital resources from
defense, and makes Social Security reform more difficult.
The tax bill lays bare the shallowness of conventional conservatism.
Call it "dime store conservatism." The president's central argument
for the bill underscores the vapidity of the measure -- "It's the
people's money." Indeed it is. But it's also the people's national
missile defense, the people's national service, and the people's national
highway system. The president's argument is for a cramped, atomized view
of America that fails to inspire greatness.
The media and the Democrats, however, commit a major blunder when they
suggest that the Bush administration is too rigidly "right wing."
In reality it is extremely flexible; call it "Gumby conservatism."
On the domestic front it is reliably pro-corporate, but it will relent
in the face of environmental counter-assault. On foreign policy, it is
alternately bellicose and supine (note the "apology" letter
to the Chinese over the plane incident).
So, what about the Democrats? In the (partial) opposition, the Democrats
seem to be going retro -- a return to the pre-New Democrat Dukakis and
Mondale positions. The Democrats are reaching back for their golden oldies
from the '80s, attacking "Star Wars." Do the Democrats really
want to be the party that keeps America defenseless? Rather than reforming
entitlements, Democrats seem to have an insatiable appetite for yet more
federal spending programs. In lieu of serious political argument, the
Democrats lazily hurl the political epithet that the Bush administration
is "extremist."
What is striking is that Democrats seem to have forgotten what they should
have learned from Bill Clinton. While there is much worth forgetting in
his legacy, Clinton was successful in winning the White House in 1992
by employing a centrist critique of the first Bush administration. Clinton
attacked it from a human rights-interventionist posture on foreign policy.
He advocated the "end of welfare as we know it." Ironically,
it was only by betraying his New Democrat cultural roots with his personal
behavior that Clinton prevented the Democrats from retaining the White
House.
Modern adherents of the Bull Moose can draw from the examples of T.R.
as well as from President Kennedy and the New Democrats. They can press
for universal national service since the greatest challenge to our nation
is not a material one, but one of renewing the responsibilities and obligations
of citizenship. The nation should begin moving toward the goal of making
service, including military, a rite of passage for all young Americans.
Finally, this third force adopts T.R.'s and Ronald Reagan's notion of
national greatness. We are strong believers in America's "benevolent
hegemony" on the world stage -- with a robust internationalism and
a formidable military.
With the Moose again roaming our plains, this new force may emerge within
the body politic. The political parties ignore it at their peril.
Blueprint Keywords: Extra Bull Moose
