Help! I'm Turning Libertarian!

JB

One of Clinton's most important political innovations was to argue that (and demonstrate how through his policies) Democrats could and should be the party of fiscal discipline. The Democratic Party was and is committed to social programs that will open up opportunities for working class and poor people. But Clinton's point was that one had to pay for these programs. That meant one had to adopt a pay as you go strategy. You had to argue for taxes to pay for new social programs. Without those taxes, you couldn't have the programs.

The President's first term has busted the U.S. budget. His civil liberties policies have been a disaster. His secrecy and mendancity has brought shame on the country. His incompetent handling of the Iraq war has ensnared us in a quagmire that has destroyed our influence abroad and made our foreign policy going forward much more difficult. Under these circumstances, liberals must put first things first. We must restore fiscal discipline, raise taxes, and resolve the Iraq mess in the way least damaging to our long term interests. We must invest in real and practical forms of homeland security and develop new strategies for dealing with terror that do not unduly burden civil liberties. Libertarians can find common cause with most if not all of these goals. Although libertarians may not like raising taxes, many now recognize that this is necessary given the mishandling of the Nation's budget by the present Administration.

Bush's recent rhetoric about an "opportunity society"-- in which the government works to make genuine opportunities for success available for all of its citizens-- is completely consistent with liberal principles. That should not be surprising, given that when Bush seeks to engage in centrist rhetoric he often borrows heavily from successful liberal themes. (See, for example, his lovely Inaugural Address). In a liberal democracy, the government should show equal concern and respect to all of the members of the political community, and it must put in place the conditions that make equal opportunity possible. Given the track record of Bush's first term, however, I doubt that the Republican Party led by George Bush is sincerely interested in the sorts of policies that would make this a reality. In fact, three and a half years of this President have demonstrated that he is not really serious about public policy at all. Rather, he has given away the store to his base-- Christian conservatives, business interests, and wealthy contributors, and done rather little to increase opportunity for the average American, much less for the poor. Bush talks a good game-- and he has great speechwriters-- but when the chips are down he does nothing to show that he is at all serious about the high minded principles that he espouses in his best speeches.

In this political climate, libertarians should find a Kerry Administration much more palatable to their principles, especially if Kerry adopts some version of Clintonism-- fiscal discipline coupled with social libertarianism. Although many on the right simply don't trust Kerry, and have a gag reflex at the thought of voting for a Democrat, they must recognize by now that the Republican candidate, George Bush, has an established track record as president, and he has been a disaster. Kerry with a Republican Congress is much more likely to produce sensible fiscal policies that libertarians could live with than the one party rule we have lived under for the past three and a half years.

If the nation's fiscal health is restored, and if we successfully extricate ourselves from Iraq, the interests of libertarians and liberals may well diverge again. But in the short term-- the next five or so years-- they will have and should have a number of common goals. One of those goals, and perhaps the most important, is getting rid of this mendacious and incompetent Administration.