The Case For Federalism…

July 25th, 2007 John McG

Posted in federalism, abortion, politics |

Matt Yglesias asks what’s so bad about nationalizing divisive cultural issues like abortion, gun control, and abortion.

Two terms of George W. Bush; that’s what.

Progressives may think they benefit by nationalizing these issues, because national opinion polls show they would win on these issues.

The problem is that when an issue like this is nationalized, social conservatives are very motivated to vote in national elections, because it is the only legal outlet to make their vote count.

In the current legal environment, for someone like me whose first priority is meaningfully changing abortion policy, the only election that matters is the presidential election. Because abortion policy cannot change if Roe v Wade is not overturned, and Roe v. Wade will not be overturned if John Kerry is nominating the next two or three Supreme Court Justices.

Thus, the argument that for presidential elections at least, social conservatives should base their vote entirely on abortion is plausible. And some of us did. And we have seen the results.

By nationalizing these issues, progressives have helped create a political environment where their candidates for national office start with 40% of the vote highly motivated against them. This leaves them virtually no margin for error.

If they could convince themselves it’s not such a big deal if some rectangular states ban partial birth abortion, they might be able to do some things that matter to people.

—–

While I’m here I must take issue with MY’s caricature of the social conservative position on same sex marriage. I don’t think anyone believes or believed that all families would break up the day after the first same sex couple got married.

Our position, which has not been refuted by experience, is that same sex marriage is another step in eroding what marriage means. These steps have included cultural acceptance of contraception, no-fault divorce, and many other things. That we got our back up about this particular step may reveal that opposition may be motivated partly by antipathy for gays, but does not invalidate the premise.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Brain dump

January 1st, 2007 John McG

Posted in Bush, federalism, football, politics |

Random thoughts on some things going on in the blogosphere.

The Althouse-Goldberg-Liberty Fund Conference brouhaha

You can follow the links from this post to catch up. And depite Adler saying those were the “last words,” I’ll chime in (I doubt anyone will notice).

a.) Regardless about who’s right on this, I think Althouse’s reputation suffers from her involvement in this debate. My impression of her is someone who is accustomed to accusations of racism ending debates in favor of the person launching the accusation, and doesn’t know how to handle it when it doesn’t.

b.) Jonah Goldberg detacts a double standard that isn’t quite apt for reasons Matthew Yglesias outlines here.

But it’s also true that the civil rights movement and the abolitionist movement were largely fueled by religious conviction. Shouldn’t the many commentators warning about the dangers of fusing faith and politics have to account more seriously for the possibility that what they are proposing would have robbed these movements of their fuel? But I guess it’s different because they were right and today’s “Christianists” and “theocons” are wrong.

c.) If I’m basing a new ship’s design on the design of the Titanic, I damn well better account for how my ship will avoid the same fate. If I’m proposing that we start using zeppelins again, I better be prepared to answer questions about the Hindenburg

And yes, if I’m going to say how great states’ rights are, I better account for segregation and slavery.

Whether the Liberty Fund conference is a forum where this needs to take place is less clear.

Not a Bush Not A Nixon Not A Ford Not A Lincoln
Bruce Reed writes that Bush should emulate Ford in serving the remainder of his term in humility.

The thing is I don’t think Bush is disposed to do that. And I don’t think a President Kerry would have been either.

Ford is unique among presidents in that he never was elected or sought the office of vice president or president. Thus, this type of shot was in his bag.

But I think the type of person who would do everything it takes to launch a successful presidential run is not the type of person who is going to serve with humility. I also think it’s human nature not to do that after all that work. I travelled all over the country, alienated my family, lived out of a suitcase for a solid year so I could stay out of the way? No, thank you.

In my opinion, the critical flaw of this administration is that it has aimed to maximize the power he has to do what Bush wants rather than doing the hard work of leading the country and the world community to support it. Maybe a different president would have a different style. But, “if elected, I will lead by building consensus!” doesn’t exactly get people reaching for their checkbooks.

Football predictions

  • Chiefs over Colts — Larry Johnson runs over the Colts; Dungy gets fired.
  • Cowboys over Seahawks — I really think the Cowboys are better than their loss to the Lions.
  • Patriots over Jets — Looks like the easiest call on the board, which gives me pause.
  • Eagles over Giants — Both New York teams in playoff action against their closest geographical division rivals. Should be a fun week!

AddThis Social Bookmark Button