GOPers Abandon Free Market, Each Other and Party Platform

GOPers Abandon Free Market, Each Other and Party Platform

GOPers Abandon Free Market, Each Other and Party Platform

RRepublican were divided over how to respond to an economic crisis of their own making. John McCain’s economic guru, Phil Gramm, successfully deregulated the financial-services industry; President Bush and Tom DeLay’s Congress implemented the plan, and then, with the 2008 election approaching, the economy they created was tanking.

After years of reading from the same tattered page of discarded free-market theorizing, the Grand Old Party seemed suddenly to be splitting up, with McCain saying he would fire Bush appointees and — depending on the hour — either backing or opposing a $700-billion (give or take a trillion) bailout of banks proposed by the Republican president’s man at the Treasury Department.

Republican senators and members of the House are all over the board, so much so that Democratic candidates were beginning to exploit the divisions.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

RRepublican were divided over how to respond to an economic crisis of their own making. John McCain’s economic guru, Phil Gramm, successfully deregulated the financial-services industry; President Bush and Tom DeLay’s Congress implemented the plan, and then, with the 2008 election approaching, the economy they created was tanking.

After years of reading from the same tattered page of discarded free-market theorizing, the Grand Old Party seemed suddenly to be splitting up, with McCain saying he would fire Bush appointees and — depending on the hour — either backing or opposing a $700-billion (give or take a trillion) bailout of banks proposed by the Republican president’s man at the Treasury Department.

Republican senators and members of the House are all over the board, so much so that Democratic candidates were beginning to exploit the divisions.

In Oklahoma, for instance, Democrat Andrew Rice, a state senator who is mounting an aggressive challenge to veteran Republican Senator Jim Inhofe, embraced criticisms of the bailout plan by Inhofe’s Republican colleague from Oklahoma, maverick conservative Senator Tom Coburn.

“I couldn’t agree more with Sen. Coburn,” declared Rice. “And we should all be asking ourselves, what has Jim Inhofe, who’s been in Washington 22 years, done to avert this crisis?”

The Hill newspaper, a Capitol Hill publication that tracked the fallout from the scandal, unearthed several similar circumstances, including a fascinating Republican-versus-Republican divide that a Democrat took advantage of in Idaho.

Republican Congressman Mike Simpson had publicly criticized the other Republican congressman from Idaho, Bill Sali, for making irresponsible statements regarding the bailout proposal. Speaking of Sali, one of the most extreme members of the Republican congressional caucus, Simpson told an Idaho paper, “Sometimes Bill puts himself in a philosophical position that’s untenable that he can’t get off of.”

An amused Walt Minnick, the Democrat who is challenging Sali in a district where Democrats have begun to show signs of viability, announced that he agreed with Simpson — exploiting an opening to attract sensible Republicans to his campaign.

All this Republican-on-Republican warfare could get a little confusing for a party loyalist.

Where to turn for clarity?

How about the 2008 Republican platform?

In the extensive section on the economy — which opens with a pledge to “empower” the “Sabbath collection plate” — there is a section on how best to respond to economic turbulence.

“We do not support government bailouts of private institutions,” the platform affirms, unequivocally. “Government interference in the markets exacerbates problems in the marketplace and causes the free market to take longer to correct itself. We believe in the free market as the best tool to sustained prosperity and opportunity for all.”

So, there you have it: the official, if little noted, Republican line on the bailout.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x