Republican actions alienating core supporters

By JM Cummings

A recent poll published jointly by ABC and the Washington Post shows that fewer Americans identify themselves as Republican than any time since 1983.

This trend in party affiliation poses a significant problem for the GOP, and has induced a crisis of identity and leadership, throwing the party into disarray. Quarrels and competing leadership claims abound within a party previously known for its relative discipline and solidarity.

Radio personality Rush Limbaugh has claimed a central role as ostensible "voice of the party," despite resistance from party leaders such as Republican National Convention Chairman Michael Steele and Newt Gingrich, sparking conflict and weakening an already-divided party.

Limbaugh's inflammatory rhetoric and militant partisanship has called his credibility -- and by implication, that of the whole party -- into question, while also alienating Republicans from all across the political spectrum.

The absence of a strong leader, the decay in party discipline, a muddled message and the recent round of devastating electoral defeats are all crippling the party's effectiveness. Clearly, the GOP's strategy requires a major overhaul.

Debate has centered on determining what ideological direction the party should take in the post-Bush era. In contrast to the moderate, inclusive, coalition-building strategy pursued by President Barack Obama during his campaign, Limbaugh has emphasized the need for the party to return to its roots by reestablishing ideological purity and reaching out to the traditional conservative base. He hopes to do so by weeding out moderate, "left-leaning" voices. Whether or not this approach will seal the party's demise or provide its salvation remains uncertain.

The success of the strategy propounded by Limbaugh depends on whether it addresses and resolves the fundamental causes of the popular exodus from the party. Research demonstrates that stated voter party affiliations fluctuate in relation to the performance of the economy. When times are good, people are more likely to support the party in power. Conversely, difficult economic times drive people from the party which they perceive to be responsible.

Since these economic upheavals began under the Bush administration, many have laid blame squarely on the Republican party, particularly considering its long record of anti-regulatory and pro-business stances.

The economic situation further calls into question the validity of conservative small-government, free-market ideology. Many liberal commentators claim the economic crisis demonstrates a broad-based failure of American capitalism.

Broader criticisms of the previous administration and its Congressional allies compound the anti-Republican anger sparked by the economic crisis, undermining the appeal of some core Republican tenets. The scandals that have rocked the party over the past few years have certainly hurt the party. It's hard to claim to stand for family values when so many Republican politicians are caught engaging in extramarital affairs, for example.

In addition, freedom and liberty are central elements of Republican rhetoric, yet the party has in recent times consistently worked to limit the freedoms of citizens. The Patriot Act is perhaps the most blatant and corrosive example of the GOP's hypocritical stance on freedom.

The costly and unpopular Iraq War, the neglected occupation of Afghanistan, the failure of the Doha trade talks and many other foreign policy difficulties that plagued the Bush administration have further damaged the Republican Party's credibility.

Does this mean conservative ideology has been permanently discredited? While the economic crisis has damaged public faith in free-market capitalism, that does not mean that capitalism or pro-business politics are dead. The free market and business are still essential elements of American society and as times improve many will return to the party.

Despite former President Bush's averred commitment to core conservative principles, there seems to have been little concerted, well-considered effort to apply them in practice.

Under Bush, government spending increased dramatically, limitations on civil liberties increased and the financial regulatory system was dismantled. Few supporters of the free market, even many of the most conservative, believe that business cannot function without some degree of regulation. It is therefore unfair to interpret the Bush years as signaling the failure of small government and the free market.

There is something to be said for Limbaugh's call for a return to "ideological purity." A gap between rhetoric and practice has demolished the party's credibility. A return to basic ideals could close that gap, reinvigorate the party and revive the traditional party discipline.

Limbaugh, however, is far too polarizing of a figure to accomplish this. Limbaugh's strategy could also backfire and alienate important moderate figures like John McCain. The Republican Party needs to embrace a more nuanced, considered message.

For many disaffected Republicans, the problem with the party is not its core ideology, but how this ideology is expressed and applied. While the GOP may be down, their core values still resonate with millions of Americans, and the nature of our electoral system favors their survival. So let's not count them out yet.

JM Cummings is a senior history major.