Kerry Not So Liberal, Bush Not So Conservative
By Jeffery A. Jenkins
Where does President George W. Bush stand ideologically? Some
liberals contend that he is an extremist, more conservative than
Ronald Reagan, a proponent of rolling back the many social and
economic reforms of the New Deal and Great Society. At the same
time, some conservatives argue that he is an advocate of expanding
the federal government, typified by the recent, massive expansion
in Medicare, and is thus out of step with the laissez-faire brand
of economics that underlies traditional conservatism.
In reality, the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
As
my earlier Perspective piece on John Kerry’s voting
record showed, the ideological facts behind competing political
passions and rhetoric can be quite illusive. Despite all the joined-at-the-hip
comparisons of Kerry to Edward Kennedy, the analysis showed that
Kerry is a moderate relative to his party’s Senate delegation,
slightly left of center.
Using
a variant of the same methodology this time, I compared Bush’s
ideological score to those of both Republican Senators and other
Republican
presidents across time. I also looked at how
Kerry's positions compare with other Democratic presidents, extending
my earlier analysis comparing his voting record with those of other
Democratic Senators.
For
simplicity, I examined President Bush’s score in the
last full Congress, the 107th, relative to Senate Republicans.
As it turns out, President Bush is positioned near the dividing
line between the center-right and right quartiles of the party.
So, while clearly right of center, he is not a part of the most
conservative segment of the party, which at that time was anchored
by the likes of Senators Phil Gramm and Jesse Helms.
Historically, he is considerably more conservative than presidents
Dwight Eisenhower and Gerald Ford, somewhat more conservative then
President Richard Nixon, slightly more conservative than his father,
President George H. W. Bush, but less conservative than President
Ronald Reagan.
Note
that it is commonly observed that George H. W. Bush was a distinct
moderate, who often drew the ire of conservatives loyal
to the legacy of Ronald Reagan. In fact, George H. W. Bush’s
presidency was a study in contrasts. In his first two years as
president, he spoke of “a thousand points of light” and
emphasized a “kinder, gentler” brand of conservatism.
His policy stances were reflected in an ideological score that
falls near the middle of the Republican Senate delegation, slightly
right of center. In his last two years as president, he was battered
by a stagnant economy and challenged for the nomination from the
right by Patrick Buchanan. The active courting of his conservative
base that followed is reflected by the movement of his ideological
score into the extreme-right quartile.
Is
George W. Bush following his father’s lead? That is,
with his recent support of a constitutional amendment banning gay
marriage as the 2004 election looms, is he moving rightward in
the latter half of his term? Not necessarily. Some of his other
recent policy positions, such as his support of steel tariffs and
immigration liberalization, suggest otherwise. A clearer view of
his ideological positioning likely will emerge as November approaches.
But, as of now, it appears that President Bush may be attempting
to maintain his current “middle-of-the-road” brand
of conservatism, taking some hard-right stances but also portraying
a “compassionate conservatism” side.
Developed
by Keith Poole of the University of Houston and Howard Rosenthal
of Princeton University, the methodology I employed is
used mainly to uncover the ideological predilections of members
of Congress. The simple algorithm uses congressional roll-call
votes as inputs and produces “ideological scores” for
members of Congress – based on how frequently (or infrequently)
they vote alike – which can be arrayed from left to right.
Presidents
can also be placed on this left-right continuum, based on the
positions they take on congressional roll-call votes. That
is presidents will often make their preferences known on a given
issue, prior to the issue being voted on in Congress. I used these
presidential positions to determine how President Bush would have
voted, had he been in Congress. The President’s ideological
score was then compared to those of his party’s congressional
delegation, to determine just how conservative (or liberal) he
is.
What about Senator John Kerry, the would-be president? Should
he become president, what should we expect? How does this left-leaning
moderate, based on my early analysis, compare to other recent Democratic
Presidents?
In fact, only President Lyndon Johnson appears more conservative
than John Kerry; Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton appear
slightly more liberal than Kerry; and President John F. Kennedy,
to whom Kerry often is compared, appears considerably more liberal
than the current Massachusetts senator trying to follow in his
footsteps.
Should we expect Kerry to behave differently if elected President?
As noted earlier, presidents do not operate in a vacuum. Their
actions often are heavily influenced by changing external conditions
around them.
Take
Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, who both served in the Senate
before becoming
President. Both also became more liberal once in
the White House, though each took a different path. Kennedy began
his presidency tentatively, by pursuing a moderate path and thus
placating the conservative Southern wing of his party. But midway
through his term, he established a clear and decidedly liberal
agenda, primarily with his activist policies on desegregation and
civil rights for African Americans. Johnson, on the other hand,
began his presidency in a distinctly liberal fashion, by maintaining
Kennedy’s legacy and pushing through the range of social
programs underlying his Great Society. But, consumed by Vietnam
and social unrest at home during his second term, Johnson moderated
his positions substantially.
If the Kennedy and Johnson cases are at all indicative, we might
expect Kerry, free from the deliberative and cooperative shackles
of Senate politics, to move to the left upon becoming president.
Whether such a move would be permanent, or whether he would moderate
over time, is unclear. Thus is the uncertainty of political life.
In
the end, what does all of this mean? Put simply, the American
people have
a real choice in 2004. Rather than appear as “echoes,” Bush
and Kerry represent very different ideological views of the world.
While neither carries a distinctly extremist mentality, their views
of the role that government plays in the economy and society meaningfully
diverge. We will know in November which view carries the day.
Jeffery A. Jenkins is an assistant professor of political
science and a faculty fellow at the Institute for Policy Research,
Northwestern University. |