An Opportunity for the Republican Party

[Trapper John]

I am on Newt Gingrich's email list and I just received this from his site. Like some of the Conservatives on this site and as one already said, I wish that Big Newt had disciplined Little Newt better and that he didn't have some the baggage from his relationships with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - he would have been my choice as the Republican Party's nominee in the last election. But that's water under the bridge.

I really like the entrepreneurial approach to addressing the poverty issue. This, IMO, is an excellent opportunity for the Republican party to redefine itself, get out in front on an important social issue, and still be true to Conservative values- or at least as I see them.

The idea of pairing members of the Black Congressional Caucus and Republican members of Congress to host one another in their district is one of the best ideas I have heard towards building understanding and cooperation in the Congress.

The text from that email is posted below.


Dear Friend,

I was very privileged to be invited to participate yesterday in Tavis Smiley's "A Vision for America: A Future Without Poverty" at George Washington University.
This two and a half hour discussion was televised live on C-SPAN and will be carried over four nights on PBS next week.

Tavis is celebrating his tenth year as a regular on PBS. I have always found his interviews to be fair and open to new ideas and new information. He reminded me that I was his second guest in launching his series ten years ago. (Bill Cosby was the first.) We have formed a genuine friendship and mutual engagement in the hard process of developing bipartisan solutions to great challenges.

When he asked me to participate I was delighted. Poverty in America is a large and growing problem. Any American who believes we were endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness has to be upset that so many million Americans are unable to lead full lives.

Tavis had assembled a remarkable group to discuss poverty including some passionate folks who had spent their lifetime trying to help the poor. In the course of the evening, two really useful steps emerged. First, after a powerful description by Mariana Chilton of the hard work and courageous efforts of many women in poverty to develop more entrepreneurial attitudes it occurred to me that it would be a significant step forward to rethink all assistance to the poor from the standpoint of encouraging and facilitating entrepreneurial behavior. I was deeply impressed last September by the opportunity to talk with Muhammad Yunus, the founder of the Grameen Bank. His courageous development of micro lending with loans as small as $27 led to a revolution in access to credit for the poor in Bangladesh. Today there are Grameen-like facilities operating in over 40 countries including the United States.

An empowerment model would change a lot of American laws and regulations about entitlements, disability, food stamps, Medicaid, etc. It would rethink every rule from the standpoint of encouraging independence, enterprise, and effort.
Second, we were very fortunate to have the newly elected Chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, Congresswoman Marcia Fudge of Ohio on the panel. In the discussion we agreed that a big step forward would be to match up the 42 members of the Congressional Black Caucus with 42 Republican members of Congress. Each would host the other for three days in their district.
The process of talking through and planning the visits would in themselves give members and their staffs a lot of opportunity to get to know each other better.
The actual visits would be very educational for both members and their staffs. There are a lot of differences between the districts and constituencies of much of the Congressional Black Caucus and many of the House Republicans.
Listening to each other’s constituents and visiting each other’s supporters and communities would expand both sides understanding of concerns and needs.

These two steps are both helpful innovations at a time when we need to rethink our approach to helping the poor leave poverty and we need to regain bipartisanship and communication across party lines.

Tavis Smiley deserves a lot of credit for bringing us together. The panel, featuring Dr. Cornel West, Congresswoman Fudge, Dean John Graham of the Indiana University School of Environmental and Public Affairs, Jeffery Sachs of the Earth Institute at Columbia, Jonathan Kozol, who writes on public education, Rose Anne DeMoro, head of the nurses’ union, and Mariana Chilton of the Drexel School of Public Health. You can watch on Tavis Smiley’s show on PBS all next week.

Your Friend,
Newt

[Stiletto11]

I think we need a Constitutional Caucus but there would be only 4 or 5 members.

[Dusty]

I think we need a whole new Congress. Clean sweep. Make 2010 look like a libdem victory.

[The Reaper]

I hve serious doubts about Cornell West's ability to address this problem set with anything approaching an open mind.

I am not familiar with the other esteemed members of the panel, but unless the others were centrists and West was a foil for Newt, it sounds to me like the panel may have been composed of people of a common mindset.

Since the CBC routinely ostracises conservative black Congressmen, I am not exactly sure how they would be paired up with conservative white Congressmen.

The one positive thing I did take from the article is that at least someone is communicating and proposing new ideas for outreach.

Just my .02, YMMV.

TR

[Sigaba]

Professor West and Mr. Smiley have been two of the current POTUS's most consistent, determined, and articulate critics. While the former tends to voice his thoughts before thinking them through more often than I would like, the latter tends to balance him out when they're working in tandem.

IMO, both men represent a dynamic that remains misunderstood and under appreciated by the Republican party. Namely, blacks in America, like other cohorts, are interested in ideas and policies that improve their sense of self efficacy and make the burdens of everyday life more bearable. Concurrently, they are, if one cares to listen, a politically and intellectually diverse group that often articulates the same criticisms of liberals that conservatives do.

MOO, one of the biggest stumbling blocks in any dialog between blacks and Republicans will center around the role of the federal state in our every day lives. To me, the GOP can do a lot to overcome this obstacle by stepping away from some of the vitriolic rhetoric and stereotypes that are increasingly common place and take a look at its own storied history. Simultaneously, many participants in the conversation would benefit if they were to cease viewing those holding opposing viewpoints as objects.

My two cents. YMMV.

[PSM]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

To me, the GOP can do a lot to overcome this obstacle by stepping away from some of the vitriolic rhetoric and stereotypes that are increasingly common place...

Good strategy; become wimpier than they already are.

Pat

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by PSM

Good strategy; become wimpier than they already are.

Pat

That's virtually impossible.

[Sigaba]

Originally Posted by PSM

Good strategy; become wimpier than they already are.

Pat

There's a difference between moderating one's tone/modulating the message and taking a less determined stand on matters of principle.

Originally Posted by Dusty

That's virtually impossible.

How well has getting increasingly strident worked for the GOP?

FWIW, this work provides some interesting views that anticipated many of the issues currently under discussion <<LINK>>.

[PSM]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

There's a difference between moderating one's tone/modulating the message and taking a less determined stand on matters of principle.How well has getting increasingly strident worked for the GOP?

You said you are fond of Chris Christie. Yet, he's the most bombastic RINO out there. What message needs moderating? How many more tears does Boehner need to shed?

Pat

[MR2]

I do not think that the GOP has been doing much standing for a few years now and has lost grasp of what it's principles were let alone are. And with all that, there is this ongoing colossal miscommunication foot-shooting circus fiasco that we've been practicing.

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

How well has getting increasingly strident worked for the GOP?

Is that rhetorical? They're crybabies. Cruz, Rubio and Ryan know how to communicate effectively; for the most part, the remainder are useless to me.

They don't use the power they have responsibly or effectively.

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

There's a difference between moderating one's tone/modulating the message and taking a less determined stand on matters of principle.How well has getting increasingly strident worked for the GOP?

So you see Republican leadership and their national candidates they have selected as extremists?

TR

[SF18C]

I don’t see the Republicans as extremists...but I do see them as incompetents! I see them on the Sunday shows asking the President to show some leadership, it would be nice if some of those same Repubs followed their own advice.

In my opinion the two party system has broken our political system. The issue, as I see it, is our constitution was written to have checks and balances between the branches of govt. What we have is the Demos vs the Repubs and those checks between the Executive branch and the Legislative are lost when the DNC or RNC are setting the talking points for the polices and agenda of this country! Obama wants an executive order, no problem because the Senate won’t challenge the President. No budget for over 3 years? Well that’s probably because the Senate won’t even bring a budget to vote on one to send to the President, as he might have to veto or sign something he doesn’t want the be responsible for on a political level. The republicans want to exercise the “silent filibuster” because to actually have to have an open filibuster on the floor means they might have to be responsible for what they say!

I agree with Dusty…they all need to go!

[Sigaba]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

So you see Republican leadership and their national candidates they have selected as extremists?

TR

MOO, the GOP and the Democratic Party face the same challenges -- the hydra of populism, ideological rigidity, anti-intellectualism, short attention spans, the blogosphere, an over reliance upon "wedge issues," and split ticket voters.

IRT the GOP specifically, I think that Romney veered so far right (at least rhetorically) to get the base interested that he couldn't redefine himself convincingly enough to appeal to moderate and independent voters.

If I had my druthers, the GOP would embark upon some of the outreach that I've discussed in previous posts over the years. It would change the way it presents its ideas to voters so that the focus is on how preferred policies will impact the every day lives of citizens. Concurrently, the GOP would stop being the party of "no." It would start building a record of bipartisanship by working with the Democratic Party to pick the "low hanging fruit," and adopt the comportment of the "loyal opposition" more generally.

Also, the GOP needs to get away from the name calling, to stop insisting upon ideological and cultural conformity, to cease offering vitriolic responses to political rhetoric, fix its historical amnesia, and address many of its intellectual/ideological inconsistencies. It needs to break down the echo chamber and get out of blogosphere. (A starting point may be Rule and Ruin by Geoffrey M. Kabaservice.)

It is my view that, until the GOP spends time looking in the mirror, millions of voters will continue to cast their ballots against Republican candidates and oppose Republican policies because they simply don't like Republicans. The GOP is alienating voters--in particular Latinos as well as middle class blacks--that could regenerate the party and turning them into lifelong opponents. (IME, it is lights out for many voters when they go from talking about policy preferences to how Republicans walk, talk, and act.)

At one time, the GOP was a globally relevant force. It has altered the trajectory of global history positively no fewer than three times. Now, because of its own mistakes, miscalculations, and the choices its candidates and members have made, I am not optimistic about its future as a decisive force in national politics.

My $0.02.

[Dusty]

Biden's all fired up for 2016-let's get behind him.