Dear Martha,

The Republican Party that I joined in 1960 (which admittedly had two wings) is no more. The guiding principles agreed to by most party faithful—individual responsibility as the price of individual liberty, fiscal prudence at all levels of government, stewardship of our natural resources, diplomacy supported by military power as a last resort—have universally vanished. When Newt Gingrich and the party won Congress in 1994, our party’s approach to an increasingly complex world rested on eight words: family values, low taxes, strong military, smaller government. Since then, we have continued to devolve into a party of even more simplistic approaches. “Drill, baby, drill” seemed to embody the party’s entire energy policy. We offered up Joe the Plumber and the clearly unqualified Sarah Palin. And the nation rejected us. Small wonder.

Martha, I think the Republican Party is going to enter a dark night of soul-searching. And that’s a good thing. The party I joined was driven by a cadre of intellectuals (although they distrusted academic intellectuals)—Freiderich Hayek, Ralph de Toledano, Russell Kirk, Wilmoore Kendall, and William F. Buckley, Jr.—with ideas traced back to Edmund Burke. They encouraged heterogeneity and relished robust debate. It’s quite possible that our party could return to its modern roots, but I doubt it. It is too dominated by the Rush Limbaughs and Sean Hannitys of the media. An intellectual renaissance would be hooted at and marginalized, and besides, I don’t see any thoughtful leadership on the conceptual front lines.

I will watch with interest what happens over the next year or so. If ever REP is needed, it is now. REP needs to be at the table, in the debate.

Don’t worry about Congress. The Democrats will be better on environmental issues than the Republicans. But worry like hell about the future of the Grand Old Party. If Sarah Palin is the new face of Republicanism, I’m checking out.

With best regards,

Nicholas G. Penniman IV
Naples, Florida

Hi Nick:

Martha shared with me your thoughtful letter about the current state of the Republican Party. You raise many interesting points, and I would like to underscore the opportunity that lies ahead.

You are exactly right about the cadre of intellectuals who shaped the party and rediscovered conservatism’s Burkean roots. You are also on the mark about the “dark night of soul-searching” being a good thing and that REP is needed now more than ever.

I see this period as an enormous window of opportunity for REP and ConservAmerica. Party leaders are usually not willing to consider change when the party is winning. Now, we have a string of two losing elections, and everyone is scrambling to figure out what went wrong. I am quite optimistic that the party can be moved significantly on environment and natural resource issues. Here are some of the reasons why:

• Polling on environmental issues shows that rank-and-file Republicans are much greener than most leaders of the party are. This means that the environment is clearly an area where the party can broaden its appeal with swing voters without turning off Republican voters…or sacrificing traditional conservative principles.
  
  
• Popular GOP Governors like Jon Huntsman of Utah and Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota are also pressing
  the party to be better on environmental issues, as are influential folks like Ken Mehlman, Tucker Eskew, and Republican pollster Whit Ayers.
  
  
• Club for Growth darlings Bill Sali (ID), Tim Walberg (MI) and Andy Harris (MD) all lost this year, while GOP moderates Leonard Lance (a REP member in New Jersey), Erik Paulsen (MN), Lynn Jenkins (KS) and Anh “Joseph” Cao (LA) all won.
  
  
• The McCain campaign (and to a lesser degree REP) was able to change the tone and substance of the 2008 GOP platform regarding environment and energy issues. It is certainly not 100 percent where we want it, but the changes are significant and noteworthy.
  
  
• REP was very well received by delegates at the GOP convention, with many saying that the party needs to be greener.

As for Limbaugh, Hannity and others of their ilk, I think they can be marginalized because their rhetoric, particularly on environmental and energy related issues, is increasingly shrill, indefensible and out of touch with reality. I often say that Limbaugh is peddling a radical, hedonistic ideology that is not at all conservative. It is more akin to the 1960s left-wing counterculture’s “if-it-feels-good-do-it,” “live-for-today” attitude. Only the vices are different.

I am confident that the ethic of stewardship and concern for future generations at the core of Burke’s conservatism can be sold to today’s conservatives. I also think that the ability of REP and ConservAmerica to make that argument, along with the political case for a greener GOP, is critical to success.

Since this is still a center-right country (exit polls seemed to confirm this), the window of opportunity can close very quickly, especially if the Democrats over-reach or fail to adequately address some of the nation’s most pressing challenges. Our goal must be to push the party as far as we can until that happens.

This is particularly important because the environmental issues we care so much about require sustained progress, not two steps forward that, because of a shift in political winds, are followed by two steps backwards.

With the support of you and others, REP and ConservAmerica can take full advantage of this window of opportunity.

Thank you for the feedback.
 
David Jenkins
Vice President for Government and Political Affairs