NEOCON DOMESTIC POLICY: RUNNING ON EMPTY

In recent years, neocons have been groping around for a coherent domestic agenda to match their well-articulated vision in foreign policy. While promoting "traditional values", they rightly split with the Religious Right's vision of domestic policy as kulterkampt. During the 2000 election, a fresh outlook started to emerge around the neocons embrace of John McCain, and the beginnings of the articulation of a "National Greatness" Conservatism. Domestic policy, like foreign policy would emerge from a confident embrace of American values. In foreign policy, the neocons had embraced a skepticism of market diplomacy, rightly recognizing that America's long-term interests are not the same as the short-term bottom line of certain American businesses. The next step would be to apply that reasoning on domestic issues - crafting policy around the long-term national interests, rather than short-term special interests. The major stumbling block to this path, however, remains the neocon obsession with supply-side economics. When it comes to economic policy, for the neocons it is always 1980. Here's Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard responding to the push to scrap Bush's foolish tax-cut.

Could there be a worse idea? A more economically harmful idea? A more politically destructive step the president could take? I don't think so. Bush is already squishy on domestic policy, failing to fight for his agenda on Capitol Hill--including confirmation of conservative judges, approval of oil drilling in the Alaska Northwest Wildlife Reservation (ANWR), anti-cloning legislation, and what's left of his faith-based initiative. Capitulating on taxes would remove any pretense that Bush is a serious player in domestic policy.

For Barnes, Bush needs to take a domestic stand - and he should take it on this issue. After all, Reagan didn't back down on his tax cut. Barnes, however, blithely ignores the reason why Bush has been squishy on domestic policy - his agenda, crafted to please core GOP constituencies, has never been popular. If it hadn't been for a staggering display of political cowardice by the Dems, his unpopular gift to the rich wouldn't even be in place to be repealed. If Fred Barnes and friends weren't so wedded to market fundamentalism, they'd offer Bush much better advice. Instead of standing up for the GOP's favorite special interests, stand up the Dems'. Stand up for radical education reform - the kind the teacher's union cringes at. Offer a deal with the environmentalists - ANWR for California-style carbon emission standards, and make them explain why caribou habitat is more important than energy indpendence. Bush could take a whole number of domestic stands that could both put the Dems on the defensive and actually advance the national interest. But Fred Barnes would rather Bush go down in flames behind the idea that in this time of national challenge, we must all sacrifice - except the rich. Right now, the neocons domestic policy agenda seems about as bankrupt as WorldCom.