|
The presidential election of 2000 highlighted the significant demographic divisions between the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. The strength of the Republicans lies in the South and in the middle of the country. But the voters that carried those regions for George W. Bush, mostly white and Protestant, are shrinking as a proportion of the overall United States population. Are these demographic changes a serious problem for the Republicans? If so, what can they do to bring groups that have traditionally been Democratic—Hispanics, blacks, and Catholics, for example—into the Republican Party?
Guests:
Newt Gingrich Newt Gingrich was a distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution.
Nelson W. Polsby Heller Professor of Political Science, University of California, Berkeley.
Streaming video:
Transcript:
Peter Robinson: Today on Uncommon Knowledge, a tale of two colors, blue and
red.
Announcer: Funding for this program is provided by The John M. Olin
Foundation and the Starr Foundation.
[Music]
Peter Robinson: Welcome to Uncommon Knowledge, I'm Peter Robinson. On our
show today, The Future of the Grand Old Party?
Here we have a map showing the results of the 2000 presidential
election. The republican candidate, George W. Bush carried the
counties shown in red which looks pretty good. There are, after all,
far more red counties than blue counties. However, as you'll recall,
the electoral vote between the republican candidate, Bush, and the
democratic candidate, Gore, was nearly equal and Gore actually
won a majority in the popular vote. What that means is that
although there are fewer blue counties, they contain more people.
Moreover, George W. Bush's base of support was largely white and
protestant. Those are two categories that are shrinking as a
proportion of the overall population, suggesting coming trouble for
the GOP.
So what is the future of the Republican Party? And, in particular,
can the GOP ever hope to appeal to traditionally democratic
constituencies such as African Americans, Hispanics, or Catholics?
Joining us today, two guests. Nelson Polsby is a Professor of
Political Science at the University of California at Berkeley. And
Newt Gingrich, a business consultant is former Speaker of the
House of Representatives.
Title: The Grand Old, Old Party
Peter Robinson: Last election, the Republican Party achieves almost exact parity at
the national level with the Democratic Party. Half the seats in the
Senate, sliver thin majority in the House, a President in the White
House who loses the popular vote although he wins in the electoral
college. Is there any realistic prospect that within the next few
elections, the GOP can break out of parity and achieve dominance?
Newt?
Newt Gingrich: As good a prospect as there is for the democrats.
Peter Robinson: Nelson?
Nelson Polsby: Yeah, that's probably right. That's probably right.
Peter Robinson: Okay. Political consultant, John Morgan is fond of saying that the
difference between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party
is largely the difference between Plymouth Rock and Ellis Island.
The problem? Plymouth Rock Americans are shrinking as a
proportion of the population. George Bush, in the last campaign,
made a concerted effort to reach out to three groups of non-Plymouth Rock Americans, African Americans, Hispanics,
Catholics. Let's take them one at a time. African Americans. Bob
Dole wins twelve percent in 1996. George W. Bush campaigns
again making a concerted effort to appeal to African Americans and
wins eight percent of the vote. Newt, how come?
Newt Gingrich: Well I don't--I don't think republicans are going to break through
with African Americans until they realize it is a three hundred and
sixty-five day a year project that you have to be in the community.
You have to dispute people like Julian Bond when they say you're a
racist. You have to have the nerve to be on Black radio to ble on
Black television, uh, and to be communicating in a direct way. I
mean, today the message most Africans Americans get,
unrelentingly, uh, from the NAACP, from Jesse Jackson, uh,
from--from a whole range of people is that you have a, uh,
frightening, racist, dangerous Republican Party that is eager to
eliminate your right to vote, return you to slavery. I mean, Al Gore
goes to a church just before the election and says that Bush is going
to appoint people who think that Blacks are 3/5 of a person.
That's--that's his interpretation of--of, uh, a constitutional judge.
And I think the Republican Party doesn't have a clue today how
desperately it is important to be contesting that kind of language and
contesting that kind of imagery on an every day basis, all year
around, if you're ever going to be--have any chance of breaking
through.
Peter Robinson: Nelson, I mentioned that George W. Bush got four percent less of
the African American vote than Bo--did Bob Dole. Uh…
Nelson Polsby: Well he got…
Peter Robinson: It's about thirty percent less, excuse me.
Nelson Polsby: Yeah.
Peter Robinson: Go--four points fewer.
Nelson Polsby: That's right.
Peter Robinson: Four points fewer. But he also got nine points fewer than Ronald
Reagan in 1984 and six points fewer than Barry Goldwater in 1964.
Why did George W. Bush drop--what--what--what--what's
going on?
Nelson Polsby: I--I…
Peter Robinson: Increased hostility? Why?
Nelson Polsby: I can't explain that. Um, I think by the way, um, carving up the
electorate in this fashion isn't the--isn't the republican strategy.
That is, the way republicans win presidential elections is by doing
slightly better than usual with the big middle.
Peter Robinson: The big middle. How do you…
Nelson Polsby: The big…
[Talking at same time]
Peter Robinson: Please define…
Nelson Polsby: No--no--in other words, by dividing up, um, the--the electorate
into these--into these--into the mosaic, um, you're positing that
both major parties are constructed the same way but they're not.
The democrats are the mosaic. The republicans are the party of the
big middle. And their proper strategy in my opinion, if they want to
win presidential elections, is to do slightly better than usual. That's
all it takes, with the--the middle class, uh, middling, uh--uh,
income, uh, middle educated, middle everything.
Newt Gingrich: Let--let me build on that for…
Nelson Polsby: Sure.
Newt Gingrich: …one second cause Nelson's right. There's a new book out by
Michael Barone called, The New Americans…
Nelson Polsby: Right.
Newt Gingrich: …which is a fabulous book about how America assimilates. And
basically compares Irish in the nineteenth century with African
Americans today. Uh, Italians in the nineteenth century with
Hispanics today and, uh--uh, Jews in the nineteenth century with
Asians today. I mean, re--it makes a lot of sense of it. Back to
Ellis Island for a second. The truth is republicans do very well now
with the Irish.
Peter Robinson: Right.
Newt Gingrich: Re--republicans are beginning to do very well with the Italians.
They're beginning to break through with Po--Polish Americans.
That's really the Ellis Island crew except for Jews, where for a
variety of reasons, largely ideological, uh, the republicans have
been closed out. The Jewish American vote is the second most
democratic vote after the African American vote. But I--I'm
inclined to agree largely with Nelson with one caveat. I--I think
that a re--a Republican Party, a Bush Administration, if they do
okay with the economy, if they can communicate personal social
security savings accounts to the young in a way that the young
decide it is a substantial advantage, uh, so that you--you have a
breakthrough across all young people, not just targeting ethnicity.
And then second, I do think the one place they have to fu--the
republicans have to focus very dramatically is among Hispanic
Americans.
Peter Robinson: Okay.
Newt Gingrich: If republicans can carry Hispanic Americans and keep their normal
base, they are the majority party of the next generation.
Peter Robinson: Okay, we're now…
Peter Robinson: So do the republicans need to make a special effort to reach out to
minority voters, specifically African and Hispanic Americans or
not?
Title: Minority Report
Peter Robinson: The Republican Party, like all organizations has limited resources.
And to devote resources to one endeavor is to take them away from
other endeavors. So you would agree then that the Republican
Party should just give up on African Americans?
Nelson Polsby: Look…
Peter Robinson: I'm overstating the case to be provocative but…
Nelson Polsby: Yeah. Look, um, I--I wanted to complete one sentence that you
began.
Peter Robinson: Go right ahead.
Nelson Polsby: You said, uh, Plymouth Rock is shrinking. Uh…
Peter Robinson: As a proportion of the population.
Nelson Polsby: Yes, well th--th--the other half of it is Ellis Island is closed. Uh…
Peter Robinson: Well…
Nelson Polsby: And that's--the--the--that is, of course, uh, Newt made the point
that--that if you start poking around in these Ellis Island
populations, you discover there's a fair number of republicans in
them. It seems to me the republican way of thinking about this
ought to be, how do we, uh, capitalize on the fact that more and
more Americans are in the big middle.
Peter Robinson: Listen to this…
Nelson Polsby: That--that's the problem now. As to Hispanics, very difficult
problem. Here's why. Hispanics actually in the United States come
in a number of different flavors. Um, and, for example, the--you
can see figures which show you that--that well-to-do Hispanics, uh,
in fact, tend to be republican. Uh, they're Cubans.
Peter Robinson: That's right.
Nelson Polsby: They're…
Peter Robinson: Every…
Nelson Polsby: They're Cubans…
Peter Robinson: Every--they come in a lot of flavors but there's only one that votes
republican.
Nelson Polsby: That's right.
Peter Robinson: The Cubans vote republican.
Nelson Polsby: And not all Cubans. It's the Miami Cubans. The Tampa Cubans
are democrats. So it's time to stop talking about Hispanics and start
talking about Puerto Ricans, Chicanos, Texas--Texas version
different from California version.
Peter Robinson: Why is the Texas--look, I'm willing to say, of course, there are lots
of different flavors as you put it, but a lot of them come from
Mexico. You have a…
Nelson Polsby: That's right.
Peter Robinson: …a band all from Southern Texas to Southern Arizona and
throughout California up into the Central…
Newt Gingrich: Different parts--different parts of Mexico.
[Talking at same time]
Nelson Polsby: Well yes. I mean, one of the things that happens to be true of that
population which, by the way, Mike Barone got right, um…
Peter Robinson: He compares Hispanics to…
Nelson Polsby: Italians.
Peter Robinson: Italians. Meaning strong emphasis on family.
Nelson Polsby: Well that's…
Peter Robinson: Manual labor…
Nelson Polsby: That's--no, well here's--here's the real thing. A fair number of
them came over with the intention of going back.
Peter Robinson: I see.
Nelson Polsby: They were here for economic reasons. Now, okay. So Hispanic
population, lots of different flavors. Re--requires lots of different
strategies. The great master republican strategy, in my opinion,
ought to be judging just simply on the way they've won in the past
is--is scoop them up when they get into the middle class. That's
the way you do it. You're going to get…
Peter Robinson: Throughout the 1980's and the 1990's…
Nelson Polsby: All right.
Peter Robinson: Hispanics in California cast between thirty and forty percent of their
votes for republicans in statewide races. 1994, Proposition 187 is
on the ballot in California. It's passed. It's never actually put into
effect. It's tied up in court. But the proposition would have denied
state services to illegal immigrants including schooling. In that
year, the Hispanic vote for republicans, the republican at the head of
the ticket was Pete Wilson who supported Prop 187, collapses, falls
to a little below twenty percent and it hasn't recovered yet.
Di--has--did the GOP by supporting 187, position itself as the
anti-immigrant party? And is it going to be stuck with a stigma or
is that--are there special circumstances that explain that?
Nelson Polsby: Cannot--cannot predict the future but--but…
Peter Robinson: Nelson…
Nelson Polsby: …but if you--but if you had asked me, was that a smart thing to
do? I would have said no, it wasn't a smart thing.
Peter Robinson: Newt?
Newt Gingrich: Well I--I think clearly, uh, in California for the short run, uh, it hurt
republicans with Hispanics. On the other hand, Bush got about half
the Hispanic vote in Texas running for reelection. Uh…
Peter Robinson: For reelection as governor?
Newt Gingrich: As governor. Uh, he got a very significant percentage though
across everywhere in--talking about Mexican Americans now.
Peter Robinson: Right.
Newt Gingrich: He did very well with Mexican Americans everywhere but
California. California draws him down to about thirty-five percent
of the vote nationally. Uh, and I would just suggest that Bush both
by--by his own ability to speak Spanish, by his natural inclination,
by his friendship with Vicente Fox, uh, Bush, in fact, represents a
much more inclusive republican attitude. He also presents a more
inclusive republican attitude towards African Americans. The
difference is you've had twenty years of, uh, democratic politicians
and left wing activists in the Black community creating a
monolithic sense of--by--of a siege mentality that if we don't all
stick together, crosses will be burned, churches will be bombed,
people will be in trouble. I think the Republican Party has a moral
obligation to take that on, not as a question of resources but as a
question of simply saying, you can't have a healthy country in
which sixteen-year-old Blacks grow up learning only vicious,
negative dishonest things and believing them to be true because
they never hear an alternative message. They never hear a
conflicting message. So for--from that standpoint, I think Bush has
to go for the strategy to get twenty percent of the African American
vote rather than eight percent but a strategy only to get fifty to sixty
percent of the Hispanic vote. And I think that Bush has a real
opportunity to--to be identified in a way that transcends economics.
I--I agree with Nelson. It's easier for us to get middle class votes
but you also see patterns where because of--of social bonding,
people will vote out of their class. In the south, the great swing to
the Republican Party after 1964 had fully as many poor whites as
we--as wealthy whites making the swing because, in fact, their
hostility to the federal government and their opposition to forced
integration moved many poor whites--middle class and upper
middle class whites in the south have been moving for a generation
to the Republican Party but the real breakthrough comes when
the--when as a cultural phenomenon, the white south just moves to
the Republican Party from 1964 to 1980.
Peter Robinson: All in mass.
Nelson Polsby: Okay, now look. The--the idea that these things turn on occasional
breakthroughs, uh, seems to me right. And that, of course, tells you
something about the power of that California proposition to shape
attitudes for a long time.
Peter Robinson: Let's take a closer look at the relationship between Hispanics and
the Republican Party in the nation's most populous state, California.
Title: El Estado del Oro
Peter Robinson: Let's talk about California then. We have the largest state in the
union by a considerable margin. A little over a tenth of the
population lives here. The Republican Party right up through the
governorship of Pete Wilson is in recent decades, never able to
dominate Sacramento but it is able to get enough people in the
Senate and enough people in the assembly and it's able to get
governors and it does so largely by--you've got--Los Angeles
tends to be democratic. It has for some decades now. But from
Orange County south is republican. The central valley was
republican. But now something has happened. The central valley is
now almost as Hispanic as white. Fresno County is about even. So
the huge influx, the central valley which used to be reliably
republican is now on a knife-edge. The point I'm trying to get at is
this, if the Republican Party can appeal to Hispanics in this state,
does it put the state back into play?
Newt Gingrich: Overnight.
Peter Robinson: Overnight.
Nelson Polsby: Math--mathematically…
[Talking at same time]
Peter Robinson: That is to say, is that one element…
Newt Gingrich: Hold on. Mayor Riordan, uh, I think is the most likely republican to
win statewide simply from the fact that he is a republican who will
get the largest percentage of the Hispanic community. He's been
the most effective in Los Angeles getting Hispanic votes. He has a
si--he's simpatico. He has a sense of--of common ground, uh, and
I think that that--that changes the equation almost overnight. It's
still a democratic leaning state but a--but a republican who can
effectively appeal to the Hispanic community, Abel Maldonado
who's a--a young assemblyman on the coast, who is first
generation, his parents came from Mexico. He--he is a republican
assemblyman who's right on the environment for the coast, who's
right on business and fiscal policies, who could campaign in the
Hispanic community.
Peter Robinson: Okay.
Newt Gingrich: He's the kind of guy who represents the future of the Republican
Party.
Peter Robinson: But now--now we've got a case in which we say look, California is
crucial to put the state back into play. You appeal to one group,
Hispanics and you've done it. But Nelson was just saying, wait a
minute, this is the wrong way to go about it. Republicans should
not be trying to play the politics of group identity. So the question
is, how do you adopt Nelson's rule in which you enunciate the
broad principles of the Republican Party and hope that people in the
middle…
Newt Gingrich: I didn't. I--I don't agree with Nelson's rule.
Peter Robinson: Oh well then tell us where Nelson's wrong.
Nelson Polsby: That's--that's not what the rule was.
Peter Robinson: Oh Nelson, you--you don't mind my being a little provocative. Go
ahead. Restate it.
Nelson Polsby: That's--okay. All right. The rule is simply this, republicans tend
to win the presidency when they do better with the big middle. Uh,
every political party has to also concern itself with the mosaic but
that's not the republicans' strength. The point is, the way democrats
win is by putting together this mosaic of predominantly underdog or
formerly underdog groups.
Peter Robinson: They stitch together…
Nelson Polsby: That's…
Peter Robinson: …coalitions. We appeal to the middle?
Nelson Polsby: That's right. That's the way--and the two political parties are in
fact, differently constituted. That is, they're different animals.
Peter Robinson: This is an asymmetry. It's not yen and yang. They're not mirror
images of each other at all.
[Talking at same time]
Newt Gingrich: That's exactly right.
[Talking at same time]
Nelson Polsby: That's the point I'm trying to make.
Peter Robinson: Okay.
Nelson Polsby: Ah--it's--I'm not trying to make the point that republicans
shouldn't try to cut into the groups that are extremely loyal to the
democrats…
Peter Robinson: Go ahead.
Nelson Polsby: Of course. They have to.
Newt Gingrich: But--but I think what's fascinating with the republican predicament
is that the Republican Party of the 1940's and '50's had to absorb a
group of people that made it very uncomfortable, uh, white southern
Protestants who were much more fundamentalists, much (?) less
mainstream. And there was a long period of tension as the party
ab--absorbed that. I would argue…
Peter Robinson: And they would stand out as somebody who--republican from
Alabama would stand out at lunchtime at the round…
[Talking at same time]
Newt Gingrich: There was real--I mean, there was real tension…
Peter Robinson: Right.
Newt Gingrich: …between what you--you were describing earlier as the sort of
New England tradition.
Peter Robinson: Right.
Newt Gingrich: And--and this really Scots Highlands, uh, Scots Irish tradition. Uh,
I think the party is faced now with the same challenge again. That
is, the new emerging comfortable republican national party and I
agree with Nelson, we are not the manager of coalitions. The
democrats are. The--the democrats get people who are very
uncomfortable with each other into a room for the purpose of
acquiring power, divide up the power and get back out of the room
before they have to get to know each other very well. Republicans
really do grow by aggregating. We are now going to have to
aggregate Hispanics who will make many traditional republicans
uncomfortable and traditional republicans will make Hispanics
uncomfortable. But it is inevitable mathematically if the
Republican Party is going to be a…
Peter Robinson: Right.
Newt Gingrich: …success, that it find a way to…
Peter Robinson: We've talked about African Americans and Hispanics. Let's turn to
the third minority to whom the republicans have tried to reach out,
Catholics.
Title: True Believers
Peter Robinson: Bush in the last election, loses, not badly but he loses the overall
Catholic vote. But among Catholics who attend church every week,
religiously active Catholics, he gets about, uh, fifty-seven percent of
the vote, the same amount that Ronald Reagan got. Now, eighty-four percent of white Evangelicals, Protestants, religiously active
Protestants vote for Bush but only fifty-seven percent of religiously
active Catholics vote for Bush. And according to certain GOP
strategists, the remaining forty-three percent of religiously active
Catholics is about four million voters, conveniently located in
several swing states that Bush lost narrowly, represent a very large
pool of available voters…
Nelson Polsby: Up for grabs.
Peter Robinson: …who were up for grabs. And so what the GOP should try to do is
activate and bring into the party religiously active Catholics at the
same levels that it already has white Protestants.
Nelson Polsby: Sure.
Peter Robinson: So it becomes the party of believers.
Nelson Polsby: Very, very, very sound analysis. I've--I've read it--read it myself.
Now the question is, there--couple of questions. First, is it not the
case that, uh, religiously observant Catholics are shrinking just the
way the Plymouth Rock bunch are? Maybe. Even so…
Peter Robinson: Okay.
Nelson Polsby: …this bunch is up for grabs. All right. Second, Newt has just
actually laid out the problem that will create some wedge issues.
The moral equivalent, if you like, of gays in the military for
Clinton, for Bush is stem cell research. Broker that one among this
bunch…
[Talking at same time]
Nelson Polsby: Not so--not so easy.
Peter Robinson: No.
Newt Gingrich: Let me start by pointing out that probably two million of those four
million observant Catholics who didn't vote for Bush…
Peter Robinson: Right.
Newt Gingrich: …are Hispanic. And you're talking about the same people…
[Talking at same time]
Newt Gingrich: So the truth is, if he expands his reach in the Hispanic community…
Peter Robinson: He's getting half of the weight over the Catholics.
Newt Gingrich: …he probably picks up--he probably picks up…
[Talking at same time]
Nelson Polsby: He gets eighty percent of the Mormons too but he's already won
Idaho and Utah.
Peter Robinson: Right, exactly.
[Talking at same time]
Peter Robinson: He gets them without trying to.
Nelson Polsby: Well but all right but it's true of--religiously observant people
are…
Peter Robinson: Does that concern you by the way? Gore--about forty percent of
the electorate doesn't go to church or synagogue. Gore wins a
majority of those. Forty percent consider themselves religiously
active and Bush wins the majority of those. Does it concern you
that the Democratic and Republican Parties are…
Nelson Polsby: Are different? No.
Peter Robinson: …are--are dividing along the lines of the party of unbelievers and
the party of believers?
Nelson Polsby: No. No. It seems to me perfectly sensible that there should be
differences among--with--with all…
Peter Robinson: Doesn't bother you?
Nelson Polsby: And it's a genuine differe--I--I see legitimacy in there being two
strong parties in a two-party system.
Newt Gingrich: And it's actually a little bit of the European model. I mean, if
you--if you think of the Democratic Party as being parallel to, uh,
the--the left wing parties in Europe, the European tradition for a
hundred years has been to have a vaguely religiously oriented
conservative party, uh, the Christian Democratic Union, Christian
Socialists in Germany, for example, and to have a--a relatively
unbelieving secularizing party on the left. And, in that sense, our
politics are now fairly close to the European tradition.
Nelson Polsby: And the only…
[Talking at same time]
Nelson Polsby: The only--the only question one must pose to Newt is whether you
really think Bush is the equivalent of Adeneur?
Newt Gingrich: Well one can always hope.
Peter Robinson: The religiously observant Catholics, whether Hispanic or not tend to
be pro-life.
Newt Gingrich: Right.
Peter Robinson: They tend to oppose the death penalty whereas the Evangelicals
down in the south tend to favor the death penalty. You've got a
fisher that would run through…
[Talking at same time]
Nelson Polsby: Educated--educated republican women.
Peter Robinson: Seventy percent in Cal--in California of republican women are pro-choice. How do you--how do you attempt to put together a party
with that--with that deep a fisher running through it?
[Talking at same time]
Newt Gingrich: I mean, first of all…
Nelson Polsby: …raise the issue. I mean, it's not a…
Peter Robinson: No, I know. I was trying to--I'm trying to square it up.
[Talking at same time]
Nelson Polsby: It's not as though we're putting it under the rug. That's the problem
play.
Newt Gingrich: Look, managing a majority in a country this size is always a
function to finding the things that bring your side together and split
up the other side. And it's always, I mean, go back and study
the--the best person at doing this in American history, Franklin
Delano Roosevelt. I mean, you always try to figure out how, you
know, how do you have Mississippi segregationists and Black
congressman from Chicago in the same party, at the same time,
while you're negotiating an anti-lynching law at the federal level,
uh, which was abhorrent (important?) to Mississippians who--who
rejected the idea that the federal government should stop them from
lynching people. It was really important to--actually more
important to white liberals, uh, and then to the Black community.
So start with that notion, you're always managing a coalition.
Peter Robinson: Right.
Newt Gingrich: You're always trying to find a way, uh…
Peter Robinson: Nothing new here.
Newt Gingrich: …to--to put things together.
[Talking at same time]
Peter Robinson: Well how do you do it?
Nelson Polsby: Not--not quite. It is somewhat new for republicans. That is to say,
doi--doing that trick is what democrats have been accustomed to
doing.
Peter Robinson: Precisely because the Republican Party was so overwhelmingly
white and Protestant…
[Talking at same time]
Newt Gingrich: …was a minority.
Nelson Polsby: The republicans did it b--yes, did it--did it differently and when
they won, they won with national heroes, um--uh, they were not
into distributive politics so much as in principled politics.
Newt Gingrich: But there's--there's a deep reason since I--since I lived in that
party. It was a minority party. Minority parties don't have to
manage majorities by definition. The second you become a
majority, you have a larger group of people in the room. You have
greater differences in the room and, by the way, they all want
something because they now think you're the majority. When
you're the minority, they mostly want you to stop the majority.
And that makes them fairly happy. So you can be a pretty negative
party. But as a potential--and I think both parties right now
are--are nascent majorities, neither party has a stable path to a
majority yet. So the republicans…
Peter Robinson: Last topic. A final look at the structural differences between the
Republican and Democratic Parties.
Title: "Special" Interest Rates
Peter Robinson: Comment by George Gilder, demo--quote, "Democrats essentially
buy their way into office by putting together coalit--coalitions of
fiercely engaged interest groups who could not survive without
government subsidies. Republicans who try to beat the democrats
on their own turf of interest group politics are doomed.
Republicans have to win by being leaders." That's very much what
we were saying. Okay here's--here was Ronald Reagan's
message…
Nelson Polsby: Oh, to completely--completely pejorative. Who's buying what?
Tell me about the tax cuts.
Peter Robinson: All right.
Nelson Polsby: Yo--you know…
[Talking at same time]
Peter Robinson: You're--you're allowed--you're allowed to winge and whine
about this…
[Talking at same time]
Nelson Polsby: Well yeah, I think--I think I will winge and whine about that one
because it's--because it's--it's--it's--it's…
Peter Robinson: I thought I could get that past you.
Nelson Polsby: …it's silly.
Newt Gingrich: Yeah, I'm--I'm with him. I think--I think it is a total
misrepresentation of American politics.
Peter Robinson: You do?
Newt Gingrich: Absolutely.
Peter Robinson: Okay.
Newt Gingrich: I mean, both parties have to manage interests. I mean, it's
defined--it's defined in the federalist papers.
Nelson Polsby: That's what you're supposed to do.
Newt Gingrich: It's at the core of the system. It's how Jefferson and Hamilton got
together on the national debt and the national capital. The fact is,
republicans min--the minute we became a majority, we had
interests who represented sugar. We had interests who represented
peanuts. Now these are things where, by any general, uh, economic
theory…
Peter Robinson: That is interest group politics…
Newt Gingrich: That's interest group politics.
Nelson Polsby: How about oil?
Peter Robinson: It's television so we have to wrap it up.
Nelson Polsby: Which is, by the way, not an exclusive republican franchise.
Peter Robinson: Democrats in Louisiana are…
[Talking at same time]
Nelson Polsby: Oil, democrats, same…
[Talking at same time]
Peter Robinson: Hold on. Okay look. Di--it's television, I have to kind of wrap
this up.
Nelson Polsby: Yeah.
Peter Robinson: Pre--I'm going to ask you both for a prediction and you remember
you're a political scientist and science isn't science unless it has
some predictive value. Nelson doesn't like predictions.
Nelson Polsby: Oh, that's nonsense.
Peter Robinson: Ah well listen. For four months, from January until Jefford
switched parties and gave the senate back to the democrats, for four
months the Republican Party held the house and the senate and the
White House for the first time since the 1950's. How long will it be
before that happens again? Nelson?
Nelson Polsby: Have no idea. They managed it unwisely, by the way, while they
had it.
Peter Robinson: Newt?
Newt Gingrich: Uh, I think it--I think it'll probably take them four to six years to
get the senate back but I think they'll keep the house.
Peter Robinson: But it'll hap--they'll keep that house?
Newt Gingrich: Yes.
Peter Robinson: Newt Gingrich, Nelson Polsby, thank you very much.
Peter Robinson: Newt Gingrich and Nelson Polsby agreed, the GOP faces a difficult
challenge in attempting to attract minority voters. But neither one
was willing to make a prediction that the GOP would succeed or
fail. There is, after all, no map to the future. I'm Peter Robinson,
thanks joining us.
|