The National Debate

The past week has been a tumultuous one for the Republican Party. Sarah Palin resigned as Governor. Mark Sanford, another 2012 possibility, was involved in an absurd scandal that has left him on the brink in South Carolina. Lately, the focus has been on individual politicians, though there is a developing debate revolving around the question, “Who will represent the Republican Party in 2012?” The Republican field for 2012 has been greatly diminished in the past week. But I suggest a more immediate concern. We need leaders to oppose the statist agenda proposed by the Obama administration and the Super Majority in Congress. Are Romney, Gingrich, and McCain the only leaders left standing? Jindal's response to the joint session of Congress (or the quasi SOTU address) was widely panned. He has since withdrawn from the national stage. Huckabee has a television show on Fox News, but is he the energizing figure that the GOP needs? Of course, one cannot forget Rush Limbaugh. His audience of 25 million listeners tunes in for his perspective on current events. However his controversial nature makes him an unseemly leader with high negatives and lightening rod statements. Dick Cheney’s strong stance on national security prompted a national debate on Guantanamo and enhanced interrogation. There is a consensus, even amongst Cheney supporters, that we must move on to a new generation of leaders. As of yet, this must seem to be a Republican's lament, but I want to convince you that I am more optimistic about the GOP's future.

I mentioned the debates on Capitol Hill, and considering it's the 4^th I'll use the common metaphor: There are going to be fireworks in Washington, DC. Debates require leadership, and they receive national coverage. Americans are concerned about the affordability of health care. They are willing to listen to alternative proposals, and rising Republicans must make the case for market-oriented reform that does not expand government or increase the national debt. Recent Democratic plans were priced at $1.6 trillion by the Congressional Budget Office. With Obama's "pay as we go" promise, the cost of a public option must be offset with either spending reductions or tax increases. A budget neutral health care plan could require taxes on benefits, which would be a damaging reversal for the administration. My overall point is Republicans must prove to the American people that we have better health care proposals than the current administration and Democratic Congress. There's an opening for new leadership in the GOP to develop new legislation and new ideas. Summer '09 could be an inflection point for the Republican party. The opportunity is there. Will a dynamic leader emerge?