With recent polls showing Democrats in trouble in November’s elections, and voters likely then to take out their anger on all in- cumbent public officeholders, Republicans have an op- portunity to make electoral headway. But this will only happen if they devise a plan to give voters confidence that they can — and will — solve the nation’s problems.
Voting is an emotional act. We vote our fears and hopes, but mostly we vote our impressions. Right now, voters have negative impressions of officeholders and the big-government policies coming out of Washington, D.C. They don’t like the leadership that has created the economic mess that plagues the United States, led by a stubborn 9.5 percent unemployment rate. The president’s mishandling of the Gulf oil spill and the economy hasn’t helped him; it’s shown him to be weak. By significant margins, the public believes Barack Obama doesn’t really know what to do — except spend taxpayer money.
Right now, the public’s faith in our national leaders is shaken. Democrats are perceived as big spenders (which they are), piling up trillions in new deficits atop a mounting national debt. Republicans are perceived as “no” voters who don’t have their own plan (and they don’t — yet). Voters think Republicans are unimagina- tive (and they are), using “tax cuts” and “smaller government” as their primary answer — their mantra — to national problems. Some Democrats will be re-elected just because voters can’t stand the narrow-mindedness of their Republican opponents. Tea Party-supported candidates, while principled in their simplistic approach to issues, frighten many voters, even though their ranks are growing across all demographics.
Here are three basic concepts for Republicans to run on in 2010 and 2012: Freedom, Security and Competency.
FREEDOM
Republicans should pledge that every issue coming before Congress will be viewed through the prism of whether passing it will provide more or less freedom for the individual. What national interest is promoted if individual freedom is restricted?
NATIONAL HEALTH CARE Obama and the Democrats jammed this legislation through just because they could (they had the votes), but post- passage analysis shows that the law will cost more than estimated and reduce individual freedom to control one’s health care destiny. That’s why 53 percent of the public in a recent Rasmussen poll favor repeal.
FINANCIAL REFORM The measure recently signed into law will hit Wall Street financial organizations, but simultaneously imposes burdens on small investors and financial institutions. The Treasury regulations to follow will be as important as the provi- sions of law adopted, except Obama administration bureaucrats will be writing them, and they’ll likely overreach.
GOVERNMENT SPENDING The federal budget has ballooned to $3.55 trillion (it was $2.3 trillion in 2005). Voters should remember that when government controls money, it also controls policy, and tax money is being spent in ways most Americans can’t afford and don’t understand. The $787 billion stimulus package, auto company bailouts, Cash for Clunkers and other big-spending programs adopted by Congress have not created sustainable private-sector jobs; hence, our painfully slow economic recovery.
If Republicans can tie every bureaucratic spending program to the essential question of whether it makes us more free, a plausible argument can be made for leaders to start saving our money, remembering that all government money comes from individuals somewhere along the economic chain.
SECURITY
A July Gallup poll showed 79 percent of Americans believe that terrorism is a serious or extremely serious national problem. And a non-scientific Homeland Secu- rity Group poll showed that 86.6 percent of Americans believe America is not safer with the Obama administration in charge. National security officials recently spoke publicly in a Senate hearing about their concerns for homeland security. All stated they expect serious attempts to attack the U.S. in the months ahead.
As a member of two recent defense policy panels, I’m not convinced we’re adequately prepared for such attacks — either as a government or a people. Federal agency plans are not mature. Communications between federal and state entities need attention.
While our nation would survive such an attack, the costs would be staggering. Americans want and expect our government to at least plan and be prepared for catastrophic incidents. Republicans should reassure voters that their party will restore homeland security preparedness as a national priority.
COMPETENCY
By a wide margin of 68 percent to 32 percent, Americans believe that the “political class” doesn’t care what most Americans think — a sure sign that decision- makers have lost touch and are incompetent to lead. The task for Republicans is to reveal a plan that will instill voter confidence that Republicans will govern differently than Democrats and President Obama.
Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels has achieved remark- able success in governing his state without deficits and with fewer state employees, in part by instilling in government workers the philosophy that their jobs are a privilege and they exist to serve the public — not the other way around. Competency and courtesy in governing, whether at the highest or lowest levels, should be the standards for any public servant, includ- ing Congress.
Too many Americans simply don’t like our country’s misguided domestic path and are increasingly concerned about world tensions. They’re hungry for new, capable leadership.
Republicans can provide
it if they stress Freedom, Security and Competency in the run-up to the
November elections. These timeless principles of governing will appeal
to Republicans, conservative Democrats, Independents, Libertarians and
Tea Party members. After all, these three principles are all-American.

This is an outright lie. Without government intervention GM and Chrysler would have disappeared. Ford probably would have as well because it relies on the same suppliers as GM and Chrysler. These suppliers would have gone out of business with only Ford to buy from them. Instead Ford and GM are now making hundreds of millions and Chrysler expects to be profitable next quarter.
This editorial is as vapid as George Nethercutt´s term limits promises. Aug 13, 2010 | Reply to this comment
Note the writer said "have not CREATED sustainable private-sector jobs;" (Shouting mine.) The jobs you mention are, of course, not new jobs created - the bailouts merely propped up already-existing companies and jobs.
Oct 06, 2011
-
Your closing line...well....it actually defines vapid and slanted. Of couse, many of us were disappointed when Nethercutt broke his promise on term limits. I certainly was. But time moves on and George has proven to be a very classy leader and a valuable contributor to politics after leaving office. He did not take the easy way out and go for lobbying as a means of wealth development. He could have chosen that path, but he is doing good and noble work in many areas, including philanthropy and charitable causes.
-
For those reading this, I suggest you look up the word "Vapid". Upon reading the true meaning of the word, you will find "LEGO", who does not have the courage to use a real name, is the precise definition of both vapid....and shallow. But....harsh partisans can be that way. As opposed to sober and pensive consideration, they tend to go the route of reactionary discombobulation and fubaristicism (-: Aug 13, 2010 | Reply to this comment
I think anyone who manages to read through oversimplified, inaccurate tripe like this is entitled to at least one smug line. Aug 16, 2010 | Reply to this comment
When you say: "Voting is an emotional act. We vote our fears and hopes, but mostly we vote our impressions," I hate to say it but I have to agree with you. Unfortunately, voting, as it stands, is not a logical process. If it were, you would have never been elected.
Your party tends to cultivate emotions in potential supporters and they aren´t the nice emotions either. Right now, in the USA,, we still have the luxury of voting our emotions and not logically. Someday we will no longer have that luxury, and when that happens there will no longer be a Republican Party.
Freedom, Security and Competency? For the GOP, that´s already three strikes, during their eight years at bat. Why would we want to see a repeat of that?
One thing I will say, I think your tan looks more realistic than John Boehner´s. If you were still in office we could look to you with pride in that regard. Aug 17, 2010 | Reply to this comment
Remember that this president gave 95% of Americans a tax cut in 2009, and vows the keep the Bush tax cuts for all but the top 5% of wage earners. That doesn´t sound like being taxed to death to me.
As far as the stimulus goes, it was flawed. 1/3 of it was a useless tax cut. Instead of $800 billion it should have been $1.2 trillion with a larger portion to fill in the massive holes in state budgets so that teachers, firefighters, and cops could stay on the job without cutting food stamps, which are by far the most stimulative form of spending.
Tax cuts don´t pay for themselves, and the 1st amendment doesn´t mean just for Christians. How about those for ideas. Aug 18, 2010 | Reply to this comment