Hope but no change
Editor: It’s been suggested that the Republicans have a fair chance of taking over both the House of Representatives and the Senate in November. If that is true, yours truly, a life long conservative (not a Republican and yes, there is a difference), will not be popping open any bottles of champagne in celebration, for two reasons. One, because I can’t afford champagne and two because I do not trust that the Republican party has the collective will to change things for the better.
I know that liberals reading this may rejoice and Republicans reading this may be angered, but I am a realist at heart and would rather face things head on, no matter how bad they are. And right now, things are pretty bad.
The old method of voting for whatever member of the GOP happens to put on the ticket simply doesn’t work anymore.
Arnold Schwarzenegger was a perfect example. This former body builder and very successful actor took the stage in the 2003 recall election using his immense Hollywood popularity. Running on a fairly conservative, albeit somewhat vague platform, he won his way into the governor’s mansion and took control of the most powerful state in the union, ousting failed and disgraced governor Gray Davis.
At the time, Schwarzenegger had absolutely no political experience. I voted for him with the attitude of the glass being half empty, as opposed to the Davis administration in which the glass was completely empty.
Needless to say I didn’t have high expectations for our new governor but with the bar set so low thanks to Davis and his Democratically-controlled legislature, I figured how bad could it be? Answer: Schwarzenegger turned out to be a greater failure that Davis ever was, and as a result the state of California is in far worse shape.
My problem however is more with the Republican party in general. While Gov. Schwarzenegger was implementing ridiculous budgets, it was borrowing billions of tax dollars and sponsoring AB 32, a business killing and state bankrupting environmental law. The state GOP leadership, not wanting to speak badly about a ranking member of its own party, said absolutely nothing in opposition to these policies and to this day remains silent.
My view is that such divergence from the standards of the GOP, i.e. lower taxes, less government and a free market business atmosphere, should be grounds for rejection from the party. But by saying nothing sends a mixed message to the average voter.
Being virtually fed up with the GOP, I decided to do a little investigative work to see why the party seems so inept. I called the Republican National Committee, spoke to a representative and asked a few questions. The first was, does the RNC pull back funding and support from an elected Republican official if he or she does not vote along party lines? The answer was no.
The second question was, who makes these decisions? Who is in charge? I found the answer somewhat disturbing; basically, I was told, there was no true party leader. Michael Steele, the current RNC chairman is simply a figurehead and does not set policy.
This led to my third question, what does the Republican Party stand for? The spokesman said the primary role of the RNC is to raise money for GOP candidates
Soon after I had the opportunity to speak with former congressman Tom Tancredo (R, Col.) and asked if there is a lack of central planning or strategy within the party. “Absolutely,” he said. “There is a lot of internal fighting and an ongoing power struggle within the GOP.”
I do not trust that the Republican Party has the collective will to change things around for the better. In it’s current state the GOP is a party that couldn’t find its head with both hands — assuming it had a head to find in the first place.
Dan de la Torre
Sonoma
