1hundredsixty8

The recent kerfuffle in Indiana and Arkansas over so-called religious freedom laws has brought into focus the schizophrenic nature of Republican Party politics. As Jennifer Steinhauer points out in last Thursday’s NY Times, “the tug of war between social and business-minded conservatives has been long simmering”. The simmering is now approaching the boiling point. The efforts of so-called “social conservatives” to extend government’s reach into the personal lives of citizens have run smack into very public and very adamant oppostion from major business groups such as the U.W, Chamber of Commerce and corporate giants like Walmart and Apple. Even the NCAA, whose showcase Final Four basketball games are taking place in Indianapolis, expressed concern about these laws.

Establishment Republicans have made great efforts to preserve the party’s opportunity to regain the Presidency in 2016 by margainalizing the Tea Party faction. They have been somewhat successful on the national level, as Speaker John Boehner has proven by moving legislation despite opposition from the extreme right in the House. (Pushing through Homeland Security funding in February without riders reversing President Obama’s executive actions on immigration is a good example, though it was done with the assistance of House Democrats.)

State governments are a whole other matter. The GOP completely controls 24 states, meaning both the legislature and the governorship. They control legislatures in another 7 states where the governor is not a Republican. While they have pursued their traditional objectives of cutting taxes and government spending, and relaxing wherever possible government regulation of business, they have also, since the advent of the Tea Party, pushed socially conservative legislation. They have fought gay marriage, limited abortion and placed restrictions on voting. When they apparently are off their meds, they have proposed laws to outlaw Sharia law, prevent SNAP receipients from purchasing “luxury foods” such as beef and seafood*, and even (in Missouri) sought to make it a felony for a legislator to even propose any gun control legislations. After six years of pandering to the Tea Party and other right-wing populists, this latest family fued has exposed the tenuous nature of the Republican coalition. It comes at exactly the time establishment Republicans are trying to maintain relevance as a natonal party.

I offer this hypothesis for discussion: The Republican Party is on an inexorable path to permanent minority status. The media incessantly reminds us that the demographic containing the most reliable Republican voters, older white males, is shrinking. Gerrymandering Congressional districts will eventually be less effective. As the American society changes, politics will change, too. Younger generations are generally more liberal.

We are witnessing the last gasp of a party attemtping to shape American life in a future where they will have little chance to maintain a grip on the levers of power. A professional politcal scientist with resources might be able to investigate this as a thesis. I can only observe. What I see are some states is disarray (Kansas), a roster of conservative Presidential hopefuls with little chance of being elected (Scott Walker, Ted Cruz, Chris Christie), and an Establishment candidate, Jeb Bush, who must mollify the activist right-wingers who vote in GOP primaries. The flow of Koch-Addelson-type money into politics cannot smooth over the fissures. The situation smacks of desperation.

It makes me think of Jubal Early’s raid.

In June of 1864, Robert E. Lee, under relentless pressure from Grant in Virginia, dispatched General Early to march north through the Shenandoah Valley and attempt to threaten Washington. It was a last-dtich effort and it failed. While the Confederates did reach the outskirts of the capital, Early realized that he simply did not have the strength to assault the fortifications of Fort Stevens. He withdrew and ten months later, the war ended.

*The short-sightedness of this proposal is breath-taking. It essentially forces food-stamp recipients to purchase less healthy alternatives. The long-term impact of poor diet on health equates to an increase in healthcare costs.