Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A new contract?
TownHall.com ^ | Tuesday, September 9, 2003 | by Thomas Sowell

Posted on 09/08/2003 10:22:58 PM PDT by JohnHuang2

A caller on the Rush Limbaugh show recently had an inspired suggestion for Republicans: Since the "Contract with America" was such a political success back in 1994, why not a Contract with Black America during next year's election campaign?

The original Contract with America promised that specific legislation on specific issues would be introduced and brought to a vote in Congress -- and that promise was kept. There are a growing number of important issues today on which the Republican position has more to contribute to the advancement of blacks than the position of the Democrats on those same issues.

Education is the most obvious example. Poll after poll shows that most blacks want school vouchers. But Democrats -- black and white alike -- bitterly oppose anything that would offend the teachers' unions, who are among their biggest political backers, in terms of money, votes, and the ability to mobilize precincts on Election Day with manpower and phone banks.

The teachers' unions are the 800-pound gorilla of the Democratic Party. So there is no way the Democrats can match what the Republicans can offer black parents on vouchers. But someone has to bring out that fact -- and a Contract with Black America would be one of the best ways of publicizing and dramatizing this difference between the parties.

It is not just on the need for school choice, but also the need for school discipline and school safety, that the Republicans can offer what the Democrats cannot. The kinds of liberal judges appointed or approved by Democrats have created so many "rights" for disruptive students that a few classroom clowns and hoodlums are able in many cases to destroy any hope of educating the rest of the students.

In an increasingly education-based and high-tech economy, lack of a decent education is a lifetime sentence to the bottom of the pile. Liberal judges and the American Civil Liberties Union may feel good about themselves for making it hard to expel or suspend disruptive students in ghetto schools, but the price of their little glow of self-righteousness will be paid by millions of other people -- for as long as they live.

Another exercise in self-righteousness by another key Democratic Party constituency is environmental extremism. When they make it an ordeal, and sometimes virtually impossible, to build homes or offices, for fear that some toad or worm will be inconvenienced, that means sky-high housing prices that working people cannot afford and fewer businesses to provide jobs that they need.

Census data make it painfully clear that blacks are being forced out of many communities where affluent liberal Democrats have had unchallenged control for years and have let the green agenda run amok. In such communities on the northern California coast, the numbers of blacks have fallen absolutely, even while the population as a whole has grown.

Liberal Democrats do a lot of talking about a need for "affordable housing." The time is overdue for Republicans to call them on it, expose their hypocrisy, and get out the message that there is no free lunch -- because those who end up having to pay are often those who can least afford the green agenda.

On these and other issues like crime control and gun control, Republicans hold the high cards and they just need to know how to play them. For at least a quarter of a century, Republicans have done a lousy job of getting their message out to blacks.

One reason is that so-called moderate Republicans have taken the lead on racial issues and have tried to win the black vote by offering watered-down versions of what the Democrats offer. The ultimate farce in this approach was last year's attempt by Senator Trent Lott to save his job as Majority Leader by going on Black Entertainment TV and being urged by Jack Kemp to schmooze with left-wing blacks like Kweisi Mfume.

Trying to be imitation Democrats is a strategy that has completely failed the Republicans for decades now. The time is long overdue to put their own principles in a contract and begin the process of making a coherent appeal to black voters -- one that is believable, as well as one that offers some real hope of racial progress.


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: contractwithamerica; thomassowell
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last
Tuesday, September 9, 2003

Quote of the Day by MNLDS

1 posted on 09/08/2003 10:22:58 PM PDT by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Yes! Certainly! Why pay any attention to white Americans. Draw up a contract with blacks, and run on that basis. Sheesh!

Do what's right for all Americans, and leave the racial pandering to those who hate America.

2 posted on 09/08/2003 10:29:58 PM PDT by per loin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Because it would be viewed as pandering from the Black and the Dems. With that said the only thing we're missing are articulate and persuasive politicians with some fire in their blood and the ability to communicate their beliefs. Will never ever happen. They don't have the guts. The Dems are playing poker using a full deck of race cards and our boys fold right after being dealt the cards. That is if they ever show up at the table.
3 posted on 09/08/2003 10:34:45 PM PDT by TomServo ("I worked at NASA back when we were next to Cost Cutters.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Not a bad idea at all. There are conservative initiatives that DO appeal to the black comminity, lets spell them out!
4 posted on 09/08/2003 10:35:18 PM PDT by Paradox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
The Latino voting bloc will be the biggest.
5 posted on 09/08/2003 10:36:02 PM PDT by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2; mhking
A caller on the Rush Limbaugh show recently had an inspired suggestion for Republicans: Since the "Contract with America" was such a political success back in 1994, why not a Contract with Black America during next year's election campaign?
'course that was this past Friday, and the questioner was talking to guest-host Walter E. Williams--with Thomas Sowell as Williams' guest contributing to the response.

6 posted on 09/08/2003 11:22:18 PM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (The everyday blessings of God are great--they just don't make "good copy.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: per loin
Yes! Certainly! Why pay any attention to white Americans. Draw up a contract with blacks, and run on that basis. Sheesh!
Do what's right for all Americans, and leave the racial pandering to those who hate America.
Exactly!--and that is exactly what this proposal is.

The only point to this proposal is to market the fact that Republican doctrine is better for blacks than Democratic doctrine is.

It's better for everyone--except the fat cats and grifters of the Democratic Party.


7 posted on 09/08/2003 11:39:08 PM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (The everyday blessings of God are great--they just don't make "good copy.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: per loin
I heard that caller. I understand the point about the new contract BUT I don't like it. USA does not need more racial division. Besides I'm sure many for prop 54, but then want a BLACK contract? How about Contract for American- New and Improved? The same issues discussed are the same issues everyone is dealing with.
8 posted on 09/08/2003 11:43:30 PM PDT by cyborg (i'm half and half... me mum is a muggle and me dad is a witch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion
I like Walter Williams, esp. his take on economics. He thinks the underground economy is good for keeping the bloat out of government. Sometimes I get annoyed at the way he talks about his wife. I hope it is just schtick and he's just being humorly.
9 posted on 09/08/2003 11:51:46 PM PDT by cyborg (i'm half and half... me mum is a muggle and me dad is a witch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: rdb3; Khepera; elwoodp; MAKnight; condolinda; mafree; Trueblackman; FRlurker; Teacher317; ...
Sowell bump!

Black conservative ping

If you want on (or off) of my black conservative ping list, please let me know via FREEPmail. (And no, you don't have to be black to be on the list!)

Extra warning: this is a high-volume ping list.

10 posted on 09/09/2003 7:31:31 AM PDT by mhking (Fill it to the top with the cheap taste of slop...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Why should white Republicans do this? It wouldn't make any difference in voter turn-out. Everything they listed would be viewed as programs the nasty GOP was trying to foist on the Black community.

If there ever was a real Black leader, perhaps he or she would put together a "Contract", and solicit votes for whichever party promised to fulfill most of the agenda items.

But that won't happen - the Black leaders are "shakedown artists" and they don't care about the community at large.

11 posted on 09/09/2003 4:56:39 PM PDT by speekinout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion
'course that was this past Friday, and the questioner was talking to guest-host Walter E. Williams--with Thomas Sowell as Williams' guest contributing to the response.

I heard the show as well, Thomas Sowell was great although some of the callers were a bit suspect.

I think a black contract with America would be pandering, though. Anything in the contract would probably be good for everybody, not just blacks, so what would be the point of aiming it at a particular group?

12 posted on 09/09/2003 5:17:13 PM PDT by Randjuke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Randjuke
Anything in the contract would probably be good for everybody, not just blacks, so what would be the point of aiming it at a particular group?
Two ways to look at it. One, the concept is marketing and market research. Black voters are an untapped market for Republicans, and if they can become even somewhat competitive for black votes the Democratic Party would go into the fetal position.

Two, the Great Society tells you what can happen when you do NOT focus sound (i.e., conservative) policy on the opportunity for societal improvement which the needs of black citizens imply. Essentially the idea is that sound conservative policy is marketable to blacks if you do not subvert yourself with a bunch of "Democrat lite" pandering.


13 posted on 09/09/2003 7:12:25 PM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (The everyday blessings of God are great--they just don't make "good copy.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion
I really like this idea. I think it is a great way to divide the DemonRATs and show the minorities that our policies are the best for their future.

Call it "Contract with Minority America".

14 posted on 09/15/2003 4:49:31 PM PDT by Tennessean4Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Tennessean4Bush
I like the plan, but find myself flummoxed as to how exactly to package it. It's not as if we thought that blacks alone were going to elect a majority to Congress--and a bunch of Republicans at that.

So the truth is that it is simply a relabeling of good Republican principle for its benefits to minorities. That is not nothing, even among whites--the Democrats make a killing not only among blacks but with some whites on their "compassion". Whites want to think well of themselves and, by-and-large, believing that their vote is good for minorities matters to them.

15 posted on 09/15/2003 9:11:30 PM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (The everyday blessings of God are great--they just don't make "good copy.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: conservatism_IS_compassion
Ask yourself, "Could we do any worse than 8%?"

There is little downside risk and you could perhaps peel off 20-25%, which would spell absolute doom to DemonRATs.

Of course, we don't have to label it anything but another "Contract with America". Just put in the contract all the flashpoint issues which portend to drive a wedge between the DemonRATs core constituencies (minorities) and one of its core funding sources (teacher unions). These policies do not benefit just minorities, but anyone wanting to send their children to private schools.

16 posted on 09/17/2003 5:32:15 PM PDT by Tennessean4Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Tennessean4Bush
Let’s not forget how miserably the first “Contract with America” failed. Almost nothing that was promised ever materialized and it was soon discarded by the very representatives that used it to get elected.
17 posted on 09/17/2003 6:05:01 PM PDT by thtr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: thtr
Let’s not forget how miserably the first “Contract with America” failed. Almost nothing that was promised ever materialized and it was soon discarded by the very representatives that used it to get elected.

Huh?

18 posted on 09/17/2003 6:10:30 PM PDT by Tennessean4Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Tennessean4Bush
Look-up the Contract with America and see how much (or in this case how little) was actually passed. Don't hear too much about term-limits anymore...
19 posted on 09/17/2003 6:28:34 PM PDT by thtr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: thtr
It worked beautifully, IMHO. And, the House lawmakers did precisely what they said they would in the contract, which was to bring them to a vote. They did that in every single item and they passed 7 of the 8. The only one they did not pass was the term limits, which was a long shot for passage. However, in that vein they did term limit committee chairmanships, which was a major victory. 3 of 8 items were actually passed into law, and one other sub-item under the legal reform (having to do with stockholder rights) was passed over a presidential veto. Three major items were vetoed by President Clinton, meaning the Republicans did all they could do since they did not have veto proof majorities and the Senate pubs never signed on to the contract.

The fact that they have not taken up the ball and run with it again on some of these issues speaks more for another contract rather than against another. I mean, they were focused because of it, whereas now they behave too splintered and incohesively as a majority.

Look, if you are looking for 100% passage on something like this then you are bound to be disappointed. As Churchill noted, this deliberative republic is the worst form of government, except for all the others.

Don't be so cynical. Remember, an optimist believes we live in the best of all possible worlds, while a pessimist fears this is true.

20 posted on 09/17/2003 6:48:31 PM PDT by Tennessean4Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson