Sunday, January 06, 2008

COMMENTARY: The Huckabee Phenomenon

And the fall of the old 'religious right' by Deacon Keith Fournier
1/4/2008
Catholic Online

Even within Huckabees support in the broader Christian community, one must consider the breadth of his appeal. This candidate has a growing base of Catholic support. Obviously, Catholic Christians cannot be called 'fundamentalists.'

Additionally, he has a growing base of populist supporters, showing himself to be not unlike Democratic candidate John Edwards. The HUGE difference, among several, is that Huckabee hears the cry of the poorest of the poor, children in the first home of the whole human race, their mothers womb. Edwards has bought the Democratic frontrunners’ line of calling their intentional killing through procured abortion an exercise of 'freedom.'

Next, it was Rush Limbaugh... Rush also neglects to consider that others, like Catholics, who are coming behind this candidate in increasing numbers, do not identify with the fact that the Governor was once a Southern Baptist Minister as necessarily a positive. They were concerned when he visited the mega-church of a certain anti-Catholic minister. Yet, increasingly they support him.

These two commentators reveal a growing concern over a tectonic plate shift lying beneath the emergence of Mike Huckabee. We may be seeing the end of the old 'religious right'.

Whether he takes the Republican nomination or not, Mike Huckabee may be an emerging leader of a new issue focused alliance of voters. These folks are not capable of being pidgeon holed and can exercise their prudential judgment, placing the multitude of political, economic, social and policy issues which form the backdrop for this campaign, within a hierarchy of importance.

These voters never felt comfortable being lumped under the assorted vacuous verbal political labels used by the media such as 'religious right', 'conservative', 'right wing' or 'neo-conservative'. Oh, do not get me wrong, these folks also do not fit the contemporary American use of the word 'liberal' either.

They also never liked the effort to marginalize their intelligence or dismiss their deeply held religious convictions by using disparaging labels to lump them together such as 'fundamentalist', 'evangelical', or even 'traditionalists' in a manner that is eerily reminiscent of past anti-religious bigotry such as the 'no-name' anti-catholic party of America’s past.

These folks place the dignity of every human person and the right to life from conception to natural death at the head of every concern. It is not a 'single issue' for them but a framework through which the entire race must be seen.

They argue that without the right to life there are no other rights and that persons must always take precedence. They will never accept the idea that a society should allow the killing of it’s young in the womb and, worse yet, celebrate it as a 'right' when it is wrong.

They value marriage and family as the first cell of society, the first school, first economy, first church and first mediating institution. They reject the misguided notion of 'freedom' hidden behind the smiling mask of the new libertines who seek to redefine several aberrant chosen sexual lifestyles as the equivalent of marriage and then use the power of the State to enforce their new cultural revolution. Marriage is what it is to these folks and it serves the common good.

Nor will they be won over to a model of the market which forgets that it is a servant and not a master.

These folks care about those who have not experienced the benefits of the engine of freedom that is supposed to be the market economy; the poor, the marginalized, the forgotten. They see a proper role, limited though it may be, in the exercise of 'good' government in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity.

They are not 'anti-Government.' They believe that we are, in a real sense, 'our brother’s keeper' and want to serve the common good by not only caring for their own families but reaching out in solidarity to the poor and the needy.

These folks are also concerned about a lot of other issues. However, they are able to order those issues in a hierarchy through the exercise of prudential judgment...

They are finding their voice and they may be the beginning of a new political phenomenon. This phenomenon may represent the fall of the old ‘religious right' and the emergence of a true populist movement which crosses the old, tired lines and labels.

They also may explain the Huckabee phenomenon.
***

Related Posts

13 comments:

Fr. D.L. Jones said...

I will happily provide the explosives to detonate the Republican Party... For all the reasons why the Republican ideologues (the so-called "Establishment" and the King of Conservative Talk Radio Rush) loathe Gov. Huckabee are the very reasons why I support his candidacy. Gov. Huckabee represents a sensibility which is very Catholic at its core. This is a new era of great hope my friends.

W. said...

If I understand you correctly, which I may not, I strongly disagree that the sensibility you mention is "very Catholic at its core."

H is for many things that many Catholics are for, I grant that. H is for the govt. providing them or regulating them in a way that is more socialistic, which I acknowledge that many Catholics are for.

However, the Church does not say the state should provide these things. What the Church offers is the principle of subsidiarity as a kind of tool to figure out where these needs can best be met. Some are better met at local level, and some are better met at national level. Those are prudential judgments that Catholics can disagree on.

I think he represents a sensibility that is liberal and in the cast of European socialism, which I acknowledge many Catholics share.

As one blogger said, Huckabee is a dream candidate for a liberal Catholic who remains pro-life. I would agree with that. Since I am not a liberal Catholic (liberal in the political not theological sense), I do not support him. I think many of his policies would greatly stagnate or damage our country. Not necessarily irreparably (since we survived Carter), but enough for me to not want him to be president. I think he is a stronger pro-life version of Jimmy Carter in many ways.

In another post, I plan to respond to the actual article you linked.

Fred said...

I liked the articles referred to at Paper Clippings which indicate a cultural shift in the US.

For example, here's Mark Steyn quoting Noonan: "In The Wall Street Journal, Peggy Noonan observed of Huck that 'his great power, the thing really pushing his supporters, is that they believe that what ails America and threatens its continued existence is not economic collapse or jihad, it is our culture.'"

Steyn concludes with this comment:
"Where I part company with Huck's supporters is in believing he's any kind of solution. He's friendlier to the teachers' unions than any other so-called 'cultural conservative' – which is why in New Hampshire he's the first Republican to be endorsed by the NEA. His health care pitch is Attack Of The Fifty Foot Nanny, beginning with his nationwide smoking ban. This is, as Jonah Goldberg put it, compassionate conservatism on steroids – big paternalistic government that can only enervate even further 'our culture.'"

I agree that those with limited experience like Huckabee (and others) will have to rely heavily on advisors - as G.W. Bush has. Relying on advisors is not a deal breaker, but we have to ask who will advise and how critical he will be in the face of this advice.

So, I like the impact Huckabee is having on the Republicans. But I think there's more to Catholic sensibility than fideism + saying the word 'subsidiary' when speaking to Catholic audiences... I would expect the NEA to be violently opposed to a candidate who really stands for subsidiarity...

Fr. D.L. Jones said...

Gov. Huckabee is a compassionate conservative. He is not a socialist. He balanced his state budget each year and left his state with a surplus. Something which Reagan nor either one of the Bushs did or have done. Huckabee is a fiscal conservative and a social conservative.

Gov. Huckabee has more executive experience than any candidate in either party. He was recognized by his fellow governors, his peers, as one of the best in the entire country and lead their national association.

Gov. Huckabee is a man with real convictions. He is the strongest Pro-Life and Pro-Family candidate. The ease at which he can give reasonable explanations to those principles which mean most to us, life and traditional family values, is refreshing.

He also cares for the least among us. His understanding and experience dealing with poverty, education and health care makes him a very formidable adversary against any Democrat.

W. said...

Fiscal conservative?

Perhaps I have been misreading many of his positions and how he would accomplish them. I thought I read the govt. would be much more involved than a traditional fiscal conservative would countenance.

I will check out the particulars.

Cares for the least among us?
The others don't? That is unfair and sounds like a Democrat politician. I think all those involved in politics care; there is just disagreement about how to accomplish the goals. Free marketers care; we just think the free market provides a better solution to many things than the state's (over-)involvement.

Fr. D.L. Jones said...

two must-read articles

The Presidential Candidates and the Common Good

Who Are the True Progressives?

W. said...

Here is a fiscal conservative take on Huckabee. It is from the Club for Growth:

"Governor Huckabee says he is a fiscal conservative," Club for Growth President Pat Toomey said, "but his ten-year economic-policy record as the governor of Arkansas is mixed, at best. His history includes numerous tax hikes, ballooning government spending, and increased regulation. To be sure, Governor Huckabee's record displays an occasional deference to a pro-growth philosophy, but that is only a small slice of a much bigger picture. The Club for Growth feels citizens deserve a full picture of where Governor Huckabee stands on the critical economic issues of the day."

It is true that Governor Huckabee fought for an $80 million tax cut package in 1997 that was passed by the Arkansas legislature (Cato Policy Analysis No. 315, 09/03/98); cut the state capital gains tax in 1999 (The Commercial Appeal 02/29/99); and passed the Property Taxpayers' Bill of Rights in the same year, limiting the increase in property taxes to 10% a year for individuals and 5% per taxing unit (AP 03/16/99). However, his record over the rest of his ten-year tenure tells a starkly different story.

Immediately upon taking office, Governor Huckabee signed a sales tax hike in 1996 to fund the Games and Fishing Commission and the Department of Parks and Tourism (Cato Policy Analysis No. 315, 09/03/98).
He supported an internet sales tax in 2001 (Americans for Tax Reform 01/07/07).
He publicly opposed the repeal of a sales tax on groceries and medicine in 2002 (Arkansas News Bureau 08/30/02).
He signed bills raising taxes on gasoline (1999), cigarettes (2003) (Americans for Tax Reform 01/07/07), and a $5.25 per day bed-tax on private nursing home patients in 2001 (Arkansas New Bureau 03/01/01).
He proposed another sales take hike in 2002 to fund education improvements (Arkansas News Bureau 12/05/02).
He opposed a congressional measure to ban internet taxes in 2003 (Arkansas News Bureau 11/21/03).
In 2004, he allowed a 17% sales tax increase to become law (The Gurdon Times 03/02/04).

By the end of his ten-year tenure, Governor Huckabee was responsible for a 37% higher sales tax in Arkansas, 16% higher motor fuel taxes, and 103% higher cigarette taxes according to Americans for Tax Reform (01/07/07), garnering a lifetime grade of D from the free-market Cato Institute. While he is on record supporting making the Bush tax cuts permanent, he joined Democrats in criticizing the Republican Party for tilting its tax policies "toward the people at the top end of the economic scale" (Washington Examiner 09/13/06), even though objective evidence demonstrates that the Bush tax cuts have actually shifted the tax burden to higher income taxpayers.

Finally, Governor Huckabee opposed further tax cuts at a 2005 gathering of Iowa conservatives (AP 09/17/05). On January 28, 2007, Governor Huckabee refused to pledge not to raise taxes if elected President, first on Meet the Press and then at the National Review Conservative Summit. The evidence suggests that his commitment to protecting taxpayers evidenced in his early gubernatorial years may be a thing of the past.


and closes with

His recent refusals to rule out raising taxes if elected President-the cornerstone of a pro-growth platform-perhaps indicate which path he would choose.

Unknown said...

Unfortunately, in each case so far this primary season, the more I learn about the candidate I like at the moment, the less impressed I become... first Fred, now Huck... while I agree with the positions Fournier outlines, I'm not convinced that Huck is the one best able to carry them out as President... his performance in the last couple of debates this weekend has been disappointing... a "traddy-con" should be able to defend himself more ably against econo-cons.

Relatedly, I think Noonan has a point when she notes that the President of the United States simply doesn't have *that* much influence over the many of the issues which Huck's supporters are excited about... as many have said, politics is downstream from culture, and more of us need to start paying attention to that reality.

Fr. D.L. Jones said...

Response to Club for Growth
Since January, the Club for Growth has attacked the Governor Huckabee's credentials as a fiscal conservative. The first salvo came with the release of their white paper, ""Is Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee a Pro-Growth, Economic Conservative?" An honest examination of Huckabee's tenure as governor would have to conclude that he is the most pro-growth, economic conservative with executive experience in the race. [read more]

Response to Misleading Club For Growth Attack Ad
Governor Huckabee's record on taxes as a steward of the public's money has been CLEAR and consistent as a conservative with strong pro-growth policies. The Club for Growth misrepresents this record. [read more]

W. said...

David,

Regarding the Club for Growth criticism: If you are right in your judgment about Huckabee being pro-growth and a fiscal conservative, then I hope you are right. I hope I am wrong in what I have read. From what I have seen thus far, I think the evidence goes against your opinion and more in favor of the Club for Growth, though I grant that is partially based on the evidence I have seen, which is not all of it.

No matter what happens to Huckabee during this election and after, I hope he is or becomes a fiscal conservative in the sense of promoting the free market though one that is full of persons who require a respect for their dignity, which is what I argue.

Time will tell. I just wish Huckabee sounded more free market and less big government, less taxation as answer (as he implied tonight about taxing to increase spending for education in order to fix it; you don't fix education by spending more; otherwise the DC school district would be the best in the nation).

W. said...

This brings up another question: if Huckabee is such a fiscal conservative and the Club for Growth is about as "fiscally conservative" as they come, then why are they so against him?

Did I miss something that happened between the two?

Fr. D.L. Jones said...

About the Club for Growth

Steve Stephens is the chairman of ClubforGrowth.net and a wealthy political rival from Little Rock.
Because Governor Huckabee supports earmark reform, Stephens stands to lose millions of dollars in pork for his businesses when the Governor is elected President.

(“Earmarks” is the term used to refer to a provision in legislation that directs funds to be spent on specific projects. Typically, legislators use earmarks to direct money to a particular organization or project in his/her home state or district. These mandates circumvent the merit-based or competitive allocation process.)

Anonymous said...

I think Deacon Fournier's main point is what is the reason for a Huckabee phenomenon: Catholics are starting to care, again, to believe once again that a difference can be made, even now. As for experience, maybe it's not a good thing to have too much -- for decades, "leadership" experience, like campaigning itself, has become only lots of smiling and juggling monies so they'll not irritate one another. There's such a mess being left by that seeming Raelian in office, it will be fairly overwhelming to whomever is elected; one is thus almost tempted to vote for someone with experience-- perhaps that is why Clinton and McCain took the NH primary, but Catholics' choices are necessarily much narrower, still, even if much better in this campaign. We can only look to see who has been proven to be pro-life and thus, hopefully, also anti-surge.. and if he also happens to want to do away with income tax and to disallow government solely by the government (Ron Paul), that's seems more the wagon we ought to be hopping onto. He has come out of nowhere, but finished with 8% of NH; it doesn't look overly promising, but the hope that runs under it is. His base seems to be greatly that of our young people. What a terrific sign of hope.

This is about Huckabee, so I'll let you folks get back to it, but things do seem to be looking up. Maybe in some other election, now that the Church is on board, or maybe even sooner.. we old Caths may hope to die in greater peace, knowing we did not leave to our children only blood stains of war, both inside wombs and out of country, after all.