Turning Right
Massachusetts, seat of Democratic Senator Ted Kennedy for the last thirty years, has taken a hard right. On January 19th, Scott Brown, a relatively unknown Republican candidate, swept in to snatch a 52%-47% victory from Martha Coakley, the anointed inheritor of the Kennedy Senatorial estate.
What is astounding here is that MA has not elected a Republican Senator since 1972. 2006 voter registration data shows that Republicans claim 12.5% of voters in the state, while Democrats claim 34% - nearly three times as many. A scant two months ago, predictions across the board gave Coakley the election by as much as 30 points. What changed?
In a word, Obamacare. Brown styled himself a human referendum on nationalized health care, and ran a campaign centered on his opposition to corruption and waste in Washington. Exit polls showed 78% of MA voters listed healthcare as their primary concern, which is why Brown’s platform was a home run. His 35% reversal from previous estimates is a massive upset by any standard.
In the wake of Brown’s victory, an interesting dilemma is unfolding. Just as Democrats made the tragic supposition that Obama’s 2009 victory was a signed invoice from the American people for far-left policy, crowing Republicans are precipitously close to making the same mistake. Many are reading Brown’s victory, in conjunction with Republican victories in New Jersey and Virginia, as proof of an unstoppable and inevitable Red Tide.
While this may or may not be true, ‘conservative’ and ‘Republican’ are not synonyms, and a vote against the Democratic agenda is not necessarily a vote in favor of Republicans. By assuming that America is now thirsty for red Kool-aid and scorns blue, the Right may find itself mired in the same swamp of hubris that has plagued Democrats for the last year.
Further, pundits on the Right are now pondering whether or not Brown will choose to take a shot at the Presidency. This is certainly an untimely question, but it shows the vacuum into which Brown has been elected: there are no noteworthy contenders for the Republican crown. McCain is too old, Palin is too polarizing, Steele is too wimpy.
Presently, the de facto leader of the Republican party is Rush Limbaugh, entertainer and provocateur. This paints a dubious portrait for a political party attempting to regain credibility: a jester on the throne.
For Brown’s victory to have any lasting merit, the Republican party must reincarnate. The corruption and waste in Washington has not been a single-sided endeavor – Republicans under Bush were more than happy to shoulder up to the trough and help themselves to our money. But, without a credible leader, how can the Right hope to make headway in the next Presidential election?
Mitt Romney finds himself in a perfect position to re-announce his Presidential candidacy. As a previous Governor of MA, the limelight is already on his doorstep, and Brown would certainly welcome the hand of such a highly-placed mentor.
Romney would be good for American consertvativism, in more ways than one. His fiscal choices have been responsible, and his minimalist approach to government is especially compelling in the bluest of states. Want health care? Here’s a man who has crafted and passed effective policy. And his dealings with a hostile State legislature show his willingness to work in a bipartisan environment.
Moreover, Romney is a member of the Mormon Church, which reveals a greater service he can perform. Just as JFK was hyper-scrutinized in 1960 for being a Catholic, so Romney can thank religious separatism, at least in part, for his loss to McCain during the 2008 primary. Those who purport to embrace Christian values should ask themselves if persecuting Romney for his faith was worth electing Obama.
Our national predilection for throwing mud at Mormons is puzzling. I, personally, have yet to meet anyone of the Mormon faith who I would not want as a friend, relative, or neighbor. Moreover, the complimentary values of Mormonism and conservatism must be acknowledged: God, family, country, charity. If the Jewish and Christian cultures can put aside differences, while disagreeing on foundational theology, Protestants and Mormons can do the same.
To American conservatives and/or Republicans, I say: if you truly believe this to be a nation of religious freedom and tolerance, then the choice is clear. Romney, 2012.