RSS Feed MenuThere have recently been positive developments in the Republican Party’s fortunes. Polls show increased support for conservatism and the GOP, conservatives are actively protesting for their beliefs, and Congress is starting to take note. Republicans have a real chance in 2010 — if they can form a cohesive conservative coalition.
The Republican Party was once the party of limited government and personal responsibility. Unfortunately, the GOP has been pushing libertarian-minded conservatives from the party for some time. 2008 was the worst year ever for the traditional GOP coalition. The party establishment was openly hostile to Rep. Ron Paul’s (R-TX) presidential run and the big government social conservative wing of the party even called for a plank in the party platform advocating federal internet censorship to stop adults from playing online poker. In essence, the party told poker players, internet freedom supporters, and limited government conservatives that they are no longer welcome in the GOP.
Poker players and freedom lovers submitted hundreds of comments to the GOP Platform Committee asking them to support internet freedom. As the Poker Players Alliance has over one million members, this was something to be taken seriously. The drafters of the platform got the message. They kept online poker prohibition language out of the platform, stating a desire not to lose these voters in what was shaping up to be a very difficult election year. Unfortunately, the full committee chose to restore it. Sadly, rather than making conciliatory comments to heal the rift, Family Research Council Vice President Tom McClusky instead further taunted America’s poker players with statements like, “the Pokers Players Alliance showed their hand well too early,” and “the Republican Platform Committee should be proud that they have stood up for the law and families.” Focus on the Family proudly highlights these statements on its site to this day.
Reaction to the poker plank was quick. Reason magazine took the party to task for advocating big government in their platform, and Sen. John McCain received tens of thousands of letters and phone calls in protest. Many protests were, as predicted, delivered via the voting booth on Election Day, and 2008 was a year where the GOP could not spare any votes.
One wonders why this rather small but loud minority of social conservatives has this knee-jerk reaction against poker in the first place. Maybe it’s an anachronistic holdover from the Temperance Movement of the early 1900s, when too many social conservatives unfortunately started using the power of the federal government to achieve conservative goals. This is a very dangerous thing, as a government powerful enough to give us everything we want is powerful enough to take everything we have.
Rather than wanting a government big and powerful enough to promote traditional values USING big government, perhaps conservatives ought to worry more about protecting traditional values FROM big government. Many conservatives agree. Former House Majority Leader Richard Armey, George Will, Grover Norquist, Walter Williams, and others strongly oppose what Will has termed “Prohibition II.” As President Reagan famously said, “government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”
joemarier // Oct 29, 2009 at 5:23 pm
Jim Leach wouldn’t have been a reliable vote against health care; he, of course, switched to the Democratic party after his loss, and is currently Chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities.
Virgil Goode made a series of racially inflammatory statements, and I’d chalk up his loss to that.
Rich Muny // Oct 29, 2009 at 6:34 pm
Joe,
True, pro-Obama turncoat Jim Leach is no one’s idea of a conservative, but conservatives would be better off with him voting for GOP House Leadership than with David Loebsack.
The funniest part is that GOP leadership was so out of touch that they thought pushing UIGEA would HELP Leach retain his seat. LOOOOOOL! They needed to get beyond the beltway, rather than assuming FoF lobbyists (yes, they have lobbyists) represent conservatives.
joemarier // Oct 29, 2009 at 7:02 pm
With Leach, I’m not so sure. Considering the weird effects of Gramm-Leach-Bliley, I’m kinda glad he’s not part of the health care debate on the floor.
I’ll concur that anti-gambling lobbyists don’t represent conservatives (always). But neither do pro-gambling lobbyists! Or the internet freedom lobbyists! Or the bank lobbyists! It hinges on the circumstances, alas.
And I’m happy to leave it at that. Unless I want to get an article out of this.
Rich Muny // Oct 29, 2009 at 9:50 pm
Ireign,
Big government social conservatives certainly did push the legislation. They weren’t the ONLY ones pushing it (see Jim Leach and Dianne Feinstein), but they were the ones who pushed the GOP to support this legislation.
Check out:
- FoF’s Anti-Poker Action Site: http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gambling/A000004244.cfm
- Letter from a coalition of big government social conservative groups including Focus on the Family to Congress supporting prohibiting online poker: http://fota.cdnetworks.net/pdfs/2009-06-04-gambling-letter2.pdf
- Family Research Council’s Tom McClusky at Congress arguing against this freedom: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Jw-eScfbgM
- Expired Focus on the Family alert to tell Congress to prohibit online poker: http://capwiz.com/fof/callalert/index.tt?alertid=11928116
- FoF gleefully proclaiming the passage of UIGEA: http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gambling/A000001162.cfm
Rich Muny // Oct 29, 2009 at 9:55 pm
Ireign,
Big government social conservatives certainly did push the legislation. They weren’t the ONLY ones pushing it (see Jim Leach and Sen. Dianne Feinstein), but they were the ones who pushed the GOP to support this legislation.
Check out:
- FoF’s Anti-Poker Action Site: http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gambling/A000004244.cfm
- Letter from a coalition of big government social conservative groups including Focus on the Family to Congress supporting prohibiting online poker: http://fota.cdnetworks.net/pdfs/2009-06-04-gambling-letter2.pdf
- Family Research Council’s Tom McClusky at Congress arguing against this freedom: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Jw-eScfbgM
- Expired Focus on the Family alert to tell Congress to prohibit online poker: http://capwiz.com/fof/callalert/index.tt?alertid=11928116
- FoF gleefully proclaiming the passage of UIGEA: http://www.citizenlink.org/FOSI/gambling/A000001162.cfm
sinz54 // Oct 30, 2009 at 9:10 am
The GOP has to decide once and for all if it’s going to support truly limited government–or a Big Government which uses its power to support “traditional values.”
If it’s the latter, it loses center-rightists like me. It will also lose suburbanites, single women, and minorities–the fastest-growing voting blocs in America.
Christian evangelicals don’t realize how much they scare many Americans. Those Americans know from history that when the zealotry of religion gets married to the power of government to use force, the result is disaster.
Starks // Oct 30, 2009 at 9:10 am
This is why I left the Republican Party or as I know call it The Christian Conservative Party. My father was a Republican Legislature for 20 years. Our family has been Republicans for a lifetime. My wife also a Republican for a liftime. We have all switched and left the Republican Party. Yes I voted for Obama and will continue to vote away from the GOP. Horsecrap about the GOP making ground. They will lose it again the blind idiots. The southern states and midwest states may support the GOP but that wont be enough. I have joined the No New Tax Party in my community which is for business, less government and of course less taxes. Regulate and tax the internet gambling and let Americans gamble on the net if they want. Support the American gambling establishments and become pro-business. The GOP has made me sick. They continue to pursue their run to the cliff.