Learning from the "wacky fringe"

I was able to interview Jake Towne, independent candidate for United States Congress in Pennsylvania’s 15th District, yesterday. That will run in the new week. Talking with any of these independents that take a Ron Paul sort of approach (Towne does not affiliate with Paul so I won’t lump them together) does make you reflect on how we really lack a multi-party political system in this country.

The difference between Republican and Democrat on true federal issues is incremental. They differ widely on abortion, gay rights and other issues that I think you struggle long and hard to find a constitutional base for federal policy. Abortion is a state issue. It always has been. It became a federal issue under Roe v. Wade on privacy grounds of all things. It was an unnecessary and unwise extension of constitutional rights but so be it.
We have forgotten about the constitution in both parties. It was refreshing to meet a candidate who hands out a copy of the constitution. Speaker of the House Pelosi talks about those unlimited powers of Congress in areas where they actually have no power.  Health care is a prime example.

They may be able to regulate insurance competition under the commerce clause but they can no more regulate the content of insurance contracts under Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution than they can regulate highway speed limits. Congress NEVER imposed a 55 mile per hour speed limit. They coerced the several states into doing so by linking federal highway aid. Why did they do it that way? They lack the power to set speed limits under the federal constitution.

What about the commerce clause? Well, if the commerce clause did not allow them to set speed limits on highways in direct interstate commerce, it is hard to see how they can regulate the insurance industry. Don’t forget, they built the interstate highway system not on a commerce clause theory but on national defense. The interstates are in fact the national defense highway system built after World War II when we saw how the Germans moved men and material.

Truth is both parties are well beyond the scope of the constitution these days. Both have focused on growing government. It grew under W. It is growing under Obama. W intervened in the bank crisis. Obamolsi will try to intervene in everything else from regulating insurance to mandating internet content.

The difference between the parties is incremental when it comes to defense and the economy. There may be clearer differences on education and energy and labor. None of those were cabinet departments, by the way, in the early days, when we still had a federal government operating under the United States Constitution.

For many, the dividing line between Democrat and Republican comes down to social issues. The liberals on the left. The religious right on the other side. What a change for a Republican Party which has libertarian roots. As libertarians, as small government advocates, we should think that government does not belong in bedrooms and such, but the GOP has decided to be the party of Family Values and forget its true libertarian roots.

I keep getting gleeful articles from a loyal reader in which liberal writers talk of the self-destruction of the Republican Party. We see it all around us. If you are not a Puritan, you are not a Republican. We set up a litmus test of intolerance to judge whether you are a Republican. If you favor individual choice and liberty you can’t be Republican for that would suggest you could choose a same sex marriage. Instead, you are free to think and believe as long as it follows the religious right.

We as a party have already disenfranchised those who are fiscal conservatives and social moderates. The “party” says it does not want us. They want true conservatives. Funny thing is that a true POLITICAL conservative would never get anywhere near the issue of gay rights. IT would not be a political issue and surely not a federal political issue.

No, those who wear the mantle of conservative today don’t fully understand what it  means to be a political conservative. They have lost the way. In so doing, they are doing the best job they can to drive out the moderate wing of the party. No wonder the major parties each claim about 1/3 of the voters.

At the same time, the party is also losing the most conservative members from the other side. Just as the Far Right things we moderates are too far left to be Republican, the true political conservatives find both political parties to be too far left. They argue about the size and shape of government intervention rather than seeing government should have no intervention. They argue about the nature of the federal health care program rather than seeing it must be a state program.

The fracturing of the parties will continue. We have a strange group on the right these days. The libertarian Constitutionalists (small government and individual rights) make up one group.  These are the Glenn Beck Republicans or Ron Paul Republicans. There are Sarah Palin social conservatives and smaller government that Democrats want wing. They are not true Conservatives or true Republicans because they favor too much federal power where there should be none but they want to lay claim to the mantle of Republican. Then you have the pragmatists. These are the moderates. We accept some government beyond the United States Constitution and its literal terms. We are willing to interpret. We just won’t rewrite. We also tend to the libertarian roots of our party. While we may have beliefs, they have nothing to do with government.

I think all this sets up the interview with Towne pretty well. Talking to him, you’ll hear things that won’t come from a Democratic or Republican candidate. They may even sound flaky. In truth, they are closest of all to honoring the United States Constitution as it was written. They also show the fractured nature of the right of the political spectrum.

It didn’t used to be that way. The GOP used to be more homogeneous and the Democrats were seen as the group made up of various splinter groups. Over time, parts of the GOP moved towards social intolerance or Family Values depending upon your perspective, leaving us ungodly moderates in the wake. The party also made a shift after Reagan towards bigger government, leaving our core in the wake.

I am not saying the GOP should embrace all of the policies of a Ron Paul. I do think that 225 years did do something to the interpretation of the constitutional underpinnings of government. I do think we should listen, however, to these voices that would pull us farther right politically and farther left (or more libertarian) socially and back to our roots.