Why Congress needs conservative values
July 6, 2007 | By Nathaniel Ward
“Most of America wants principled, conservative-leaning leadership,” Heritage fellow Ernest Istook writes.
The former Congressman explains that America’s elected leaders would be more popular—and implement better policies, besides—if they returned to conservative values.
Take our poll: Which of the following would improve your opinion of Congress?
“Neither party currently has the trust of the people,” he continues. “The way things are going, Congress will probably limbo even lower, unless members start listening to the will of the people... and acting on it.”
Istook writes that lawmakers’ low approval ratings can be explained two ways. First, the far left that helped elect the current majority is angered that their full agenda, including precipitous retreat from Iraq, has not yet been implemented. But more importantly, the Congress has departed from the conservative principles most Americans believe in.
“When Republicans didn’t live by their conservative principles, they lost their majority. But when people voted for change, they were asking for principled governance, not liberal leadership. Now that voters are getting the liberal leadership they never wanted, they are giving Congress its lowest approval rating in history.”
Immigration reform, one step at a time
With the Senate’s flawed immigration proposal off the table, Heritage experts are continuing to make the case for a real reform plan that secures our borders, enforces the law, welcomes legal immigrants, and does not provide amnesty for lawbreakers.
Writing on widely-read National Review Online, Heritage experts Matthew Spalding and James Carafano argue that reform “can be done incrementally. Starting now.”
“[S]ubstantive, practical reform,” they explain, “won’t require the immediate, radical, wrenching, ‘comprehensive’ overhaul of our current system embodied in the Senate’s failed proposal.”
They argue for a “realistic, four-point strategy” that “can be implemented quickly.” These reforms include: enforcing the law; regaining control of the southern border; emphasizing legal immigration; and creating flexible legal opportunities to work in the United States.
Good news on free speech
After the addition of two solidly conservative justices in the past two years, the Supreme Court is returning to a proper understanding of the Constitution. One decision last week is indicative of the trend.
“The original meaning of the First Amendment was partially restored by a key Supreme Court decision last week,” Heritage President Ed Feulner writes in The Chicago Sun-Times.
Read more about the victory for free speech.
And mixed news on free speech
There is more good news for free speech: the House of Representatives recently voted—and overwhelmingly—to block funding for the so-called Fairness Doctrine. The move can be credited in no small measure to Heritage Foundation members and conservatives nationwide who got the message out about the threat the Doctrine posed to free speech.
But the battle to keep the government from silencing conservative voices on the air is far from over. “The real battle over media regulation is still to come, and won’t involve the words ‘Fairness Doctrine,’” Heritage expert James Gattuso writes.
Liberals are now pushing for “reforms” that would require radio operators to operate in the “public interest” and impose arduous new regulations on private ownership of radio and television stations.
Liberals want to go further than the Fairness Doctrine. Find out exactly what they want to do.
In other news
- A new review of federal nutrition programs—which cost taxpayers to the tune of $1 billion every year—finds that nearly all failed to change eating behavior. While proper nutrition is certainly important, these are individual decisions that perhaps the federal government should not—and apparently cannot—get involved with.
- Educators in Montgomery County, MD, have been cleared to initiate a radical new “sex-ed” program that instructs students on homosexuality and even includes “a DVD on the correct use of a condom.” Should schools really be teaching young kids how to have sex?
- International efforts to reduce barriers to free enterprise at the Doha negotiations may stall, America’s chief negotiator warned today.
- Bedridden Cuban dictator Fidel Castro understands what some American policymakers don’t: there are tradeoffs to government-mandated alternative fuel programs. Castro, who’s wrong about so much, explains that the increased use of foodstuffs like corn to make ethanol fuel—heavily subsidized by the federal government—will drive up the cost of food, with potentially harmful consequences for the poor.
Coming up at Heritage
To attend the following Heritage Foundation events, RSVP at Heritage’s events website. Or you can watch these events live online at Heritage.org. All times are Eastern.
- On Tuesday, July 10 at noon, James Phillips hosts a panel discussion on the new book Taking on Tehran, featuring Ilan Berman of the American Foreign Policy Council.
- On Wednesday, July 11 at 11 a.m., Edwin Meese hosts a panel discussion on the Supreme Court’s recent term.
- On Thursday, July 12 at 11:30 a.m., scholar David Aikman speaks on the possibility of peaceful reform in communist China.
Nathaniel Ward is the Editor of MyHeritage.org—a website for members and supporters of The Heritage Foundation. DeEtte Chatterton contributed to this report.
