This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/25/opinion/republicans-libertarians-economics.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Why Are Republicans Warping ‘the Very Heart and Soul of Conservatism’? Republicans Are Ripping Out ‘the Very Heart and Soul’ of Their Party
(about 3 hours later)
In 1975, the future president Ronald Reagan said, “I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism.”In 1975, the future president Ronald Reagan said, “I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism.”
Today, many leaders of the Republican Party have coalesced around a desire to purge libertarians, with our pesky commitments to economic liberty and international trade, from their midst. If Mr. Reagan’s agenda was a three-legged stool of religious traditionalism, a strong national defense and free-market economics, they hope the latter leg can be reduced to sawdust and scattered to the winds.Today, many leaders of the Republican Party have coalesced around a desire to purge libertarians, with our pesky commitments to economic liberty and international trade, from their midst. If Mr. Reagan’s agenda was a three-legged stool of religious traditionalism, a strong national defense and free-market economics, they hope the latter leg can be reduced to sawdust and scattered to the winds.
The Republican Party seems to become more comfortable with top-down economic interventionism by the day. Rising stars denounce the global market integration that has defined the postwar era. Last year in a speech calling for a national pivot to “common-good capitalism,” Senator Marco Rubio of Florida declared, “Our challenge is an economic order that is bad for America.” Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri insists, “It’s time we ended the cosmopolitan experiment.”The Republican Party seems to become more comfortable with top-down economic interventionism by the day. Rising stars denounce the global market integration that has defined the postwar era. Last year in a speech calling for a national pivot to “common-good capitalism,” Senator Marco Rubio of Florida declared, “Our challenge is an economic order that is bad for America.” Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri insists, “It’s time we ended the cosmopolitan experiment.”
Should these big-government conservatives get their way, libertarians believe — like a majority of Republicans once did — that the result will be slower growth, less dynamism and fewer opportunities for all. We insist the solution to most problems starts with removing the market distortions that government interference created in the first place.Should these big-government conservatives get their way, libertarians believe — like a majority of Republicans once did — that the result will be slower growth, less dynamism and fewer opportunities for all. We insist the solution to most problems starts with removing the market distortions that government interference created in the first place.
Top-down economic planning, whether it comes from the left or the right, inevitably leads to sclerosis, incompetence and cronyism.Top-down economic planning, whether it comes from the left or the right, inevitably leads to sclerosis, incompetence and cronyism.
Global capitalism remains the greatest engine of prosperity. In the past five years, according to the World Bank, the percentage of the world’s population living in extreme poverty dropped into single digits for the first time. President Trump’s trade war, though, has shown us that “managing” the economy nearly always backfires. In December, a Federal Reserve study found that the 2018 tariffs were “associated with relative reductions in manufacturing employment and relative increases in producer prices.”Global capitalism remains the greatest engine of prosperity. In the past five years, according to the World Bank, the percentage of the world’s population living in extreme poverty dropped into single digits for the first time. President Trump’s trade war, though, has shown us that “managing” the economy nearly always backfires. In December, a Federal Reserve study found that the 2018 tariffs were “associated with relative reductions in manufacturing employment and relative increases in producer prices.”
The economic agendas of big-government conservatives could easily be confused for proposals from the left. Consider Oren Cass, a former adviser to Senator Mitt Romney. At last summer’s National Conservatism Conference, Mr. Cass argued for a robust “industrial policy” for the United States. That would include a federal program of research-and-development subsidies, infrastructure investments, “bias[ing] the tax code” in favor of producers of “physical things,” aggressive retaliation against countries that don’t abide by our trade rules and more.The economic agendas of big-government conservatives could easily be confused for proposals from the left. Consider Oren Cass, a former adviser to Senator Mitt Romney. At last summer’s National Conservatism Conference, Mr. Cass argued for a robust “industrial policy” for the United States. That would include a federal program of research-and-development subsidies, infrastructure investments, “bias[ing] the tax code” in favor of producers of “physical things,” aggressive retaliation against countries that don’t abide by our trade rules and more.
More recently, Mr. Cass has begun arguing for a new model of corporate governance that would privilege worker well-being over corporate profits — in other words, over a company’s ability to operate and employ people. It is meant as an alternative to both the conventional corporate mentality, in which shareholders’ bottom lines come first, and the modern push for progressively inflected corporate social responsibility. Regulatory constraints to impose his new model are justified, he says, because neither of those approaches has produced sufficient investment by companies into their workforces and communities. What constitutes optimal corporate investment is apparently for bureaucrats in Washington to decide.More recently, Mr. Cass has begun arguing for a new model of corporate governance that would privilege worker well-being over corporate profits — in other words, over a company’s ability to operate and employ people. It is meant as an alternative to both the conventional corporate mentality, in which shareholders’ bottom lines come first, and the modern push for progressively inflected corporate social responsibility. Regulatory constraints to impose his new model are justified, he says, because neither of those approaches has produced sufficient investment by companies into their workforces and communities. What constitutes optimal corporate investment is apparently for bureaucrats in Washington to decide.
Advocates like Mr. Cass see this shift as a political necessity for the Republican Party. They believe the shocking outcome of the 2016 election proves that the Republican base is looking for a hand up; the rest of the field was busy mouthing platitudes about liberty, but only Mr. Trump spoke to their concerns.Advocates like Mr. Cass see this shift as a political necessity for the Republican Party. They believe the shocking outcome of the 2016 election proves that the Republican base is looking for a hand up; the rest of the field was busy mouthing platitudes about liberty, but only Mr. Trump spoke to their concerns.
This may be a bigger political gamble than conservatives appreciate. Survey research strongly suggests that Americans still support open markets. In July 2019, the Pew Research Center found a solid 65 percent of Americans saying that free-trade agreements “have been a good thing for the United States,” up from 45 percent just before the 2016 election. So during President Trump’s protectionist first term, support for international commerce has robustly increased.This may be a bigger political gamble than conservatives appreciate. Survey research strongly suggests that Americans still support open markets. In July 2019, the Pew Research Center found a solid 65 percent of Americans saying that free-trade agreements “have been a good thing for the United States,” up from 45 percent just before the 2016 election. So during President Trump’s protectionist first term, support for international commerce has robustly increased.
Last September, Gallup found that 87 percent of Americans have a positive view of “free enterprise” and 70 percent think “business can do things more efficiently than government can.” These results hold regardless of party affiliation, but they’re stronger on the political right. Only 7 percent of Republicans said there was too little government regulation of business and industry, for example, compared with 46 percent of Democrats.Last September, Gallup found that 87 percent of Americans have a positive view of “free enterprise” and 70 percent think “business can do things more efficiently than government can.” These results hold regardless of party affiliation, but they’re stronger on the political right. Only 7 percent of Republicans said there was too little government regulation of business and industry, for example, compared with 46 percent of Democrats.
Could it be that the 2016 upset was attributable to something other than a wholesale rejection of limited-government principles among the Republican base?Could it be that the 2016 upset was attributable to something other than a wholesale rejection of limited-government principles among the Republican base?
To be clear, I am not predicting that the libertarian moment has finally arrived. One 2017 study suggested that people who want the government to stay out of your bedroom as well as your pocketbook (as the saying goes) make up an almost vanishingly small share of the voting population. But within the Republican coalition, there is a genuine constituency for economic freedom.To be clear, I am not predicting that the libertarian moment has finally arrived. One 2017 study suggested that people who want the government to stay out of your bedroom as well as your pocketbook (as the saying goes) make up an almost vanishingly small share of the voting population. But within the Republican coalition, there is a genuine constituency for economic freedom.
Proponents of big-government conservatism point to a crisis of “stagnant wages, a labor-force exodus, too many unstable families and crumbling communities” caused, they believe, by the unwillingness of American elites to protect working-class jobs from foreign competition. The dream of a family supported by a single breadwinner is increasingly out of reach, they say, especially for men without college degrees.Proponents of big-government conservatism point to a crisis of “stagnant wages, a labor-force exodus, too many unstable families and crumbling communities” caused, they believe, by the unwillingness of American elites to protect working-class jobs from foreign competition. The dream of a family supported by a single breadwinner is increasingly out of reach, they say, especially for men without college degrees.
Yet some scholars have questioned the data underpinning this narrative. Michael Strain of the American Enterprise Institute, for example, notes that the wages of nonsupervisory workers have increased by 33 percent, accounting for inflation, since 1990; when taxes and transfers as well as inflation are considered, incomes in the lowest quintile of households rose by 66 percent over the same period.Yet some scholars have questioned the data underpinning this narrative. Michael Strain of the American Enterprise Institute, for example, notes that the wages of nonsupervisory workers have increased by 33 percent, accounting for inflation, since 1990; when taxes and transfers as well as inflation are considered, incomes in the lowest quintile of households rose by 66 percent over the same period.
To the extent that the cost of living can seem to be spiraling out of control, the phenomenon is overwhelmingly driven by health care, higher education and housing — three sectors that have long been heavily regulated and wildly subsidized. And thanks to global capitalism, even the least among us today have access to an ever-improving array of food, medicine, technology, entertainment and more.To the extent that the cost of living can seem to be spiraling out of control, the phenomenon is overwhelmingly driven by health care, higher education and housing — three sectors that have long been heavily regulated and wildly subsidized. And thanks to global capitalism, even the least among us today have access to an ever-improving array of food, medicine, technology, entertainment and more.
This is why libertarians highlight market distortions. Instead of spending ever more on rental assistance for low-income families who must then compete with one another and their wealthier peers, increase the housing stock and drive down prices by getting rid of zoning and land-use restrictions; instead of using tax dollars to prop up dying manufacturers, accept the affordability and abundance that imports offer and unleash America’s productive capacity to tackle other problems (including things like climate change) and create new jobs.This is why libertarians highlight market distortions. Instead of spending ever more on rental assistance for low-income families who must then compete with one another and their wealthier peers, increase the housing stock and drive down prices by getting rid of zoning and land-use restrictions; instead of using tax dollars to prop up dying manufacturers, accept the affordability and abundance that imports offer and unleash America’s productive capacity to tackle other problems (including things like climate change) and create new jobs.
In trying to direct the economy from Washington, conservatives would be doubling down on progressives’ mistakes. And in trying to duplicate their political success from 2016, Republicans may be tearing out their movement’s heart and soul.In trying to direct the economy from Washington, conservatives would be doubling down on progressives’ mistakes. And in trying to duplicate their political success from 2016, Republicans may be tearing out their movement’s heart and soul.
Stephanie Slade (@sladesr) is the managing editor of Reason magazine.Stephanie Slade (@sladesr) is the managing editor of Reason magazine.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.