In one sense, I should admire and treasure the few sincere Republican centrists left. They’ve largely been run out of their party on a rail, so perhaps it’d be wise to cut them considerable slack and support their efforts to drag their party back away from the right-wing fringe.
In truth, I’d like to. I’d enjoy seeing the Republican Party change from within, embrace moderation, cast off its radical elements, and re-join the American mainstream. But I can’t cut GOP centrists any slack because they’re just so inept in their efforts.
The former New Jersey governor and Bush Cabinet member is warning that religious extremists have taken over the Republican Party and the administration in which she served. It’s a devastating critique — or at least it would be if [Christie Whitman] backed it up with the sort of actions that would get the party to take her seriously.
But Christine Todd Whitman, last vestige of Rockefeller Republicanism, is too nice to do that. Prim and sensible as she sat in a green armchair and pitched her new book at a Council on Foreign Relations forum this week, Bush’s former chief of the Environmental Protection Agency ruled out quitting the GOP or launching a presidential candidacy. She even refused — politely, of course — to identify a single one of the “social fundamentalists” she claims have hijacked the Republican Party.
“Why don’t you share some of those names with us now?” the moderator, Harvard’s Marvin Kalb, proposed.
“That’s too easy,” Whitman demurred. “It then becomes a spitting contest….”
And on it went. Kalb all but begged Whitman to identify those whom she believes has ruined her party, but she refused.
It’s a familiar pattern that underscores why Whitman and her compatriots are losing the fight. Badly.
It’s wrong to suggest that there is no such thing as Republican moderates. They exist, but they’re tiny in number and inconsequential in shaping the direction and policies of their party.
But here’s the rub: their plight is largely a problem of their own making.
Yes, at this point, they’re outnumbered. Far-right activists have taken over the GOP at every level, so fights over, say, the party platform aren’t particularly competitive. But what moderates like Whitman fail to appreciate is that they have some leverage, they just choose not to use it.
[Whitman] pronounced that “there is a time limit on the ability to keep trying to change from within” — but she didn’t say what that limit was. She said, “I want to see Republicans win, up to a point” — but she didn’t say what that point was.
Will you leave the Republican Party? No, says Whitman. Will you identify the worst elements of the party? Can’t, says Whitman. Will you keep helping elect Republicans, despite your disgust with what the party has become? Of course, says Whitman.
I don’t mean to pick on Whitman; it’s not just her. Linc Chafee, Chris Shays, Ann Stone, the Log Cabin Republicans, they all insist that the GOP needs to move towards the middle again, but none of them are willing to take any steps that might produce change. They talk a decent game about their concerns — right before they make Tom DeLay and Rick Santorum party leaders and dump more money in GOP campaign coffers.
The Republican leadership responds to threats. When Jim Jeffords bolted in 2001, the party was momentarily stunned and concerned. It didn’t last. No one else followed Jeffords out the door, the right closed ranks, and it was business as usual.
What, exactly, does Whitman hope to accomplish condemning her party while simultaneously pledging to stay in it and helping elect those who are taking the party in the wrong direction? What incentive does the party have to change if centrists bemoan the GOP’s direction but stick with the party anyway?
These centrists start with limited influence and throw it away by agreeing to be “team players,” even as they resent what’s happened to their team. It’s not just pathetic; it’s counterproductive. If they want to start affecting change, they’ll need to adopt something other than a “go along, get along” strategy.