Professional Documents
Culture Documents
by
Laurence M. Vance
Books by Laurence M. Vance
Laurence M. Vance
Vance Publications
Pensacola, FL
The Revolution that Wasn’t
Copyright © 2009 by Laurence M. Vance
All Rights Reserved
ISBN: 978-0-9823697-0-8
5
6 THE REVOLUTION THAT WASN’T
It has been more than a year now since the Republicans gained an
absolute majority in Congress and the White House. The road to this
majority began in the third year of Bill Clinton’s first term. The
Republicans gained complete control of the 104th Congress
(1995–1997), held on to control in the 105th Congress (1997–1999),
and remained in power during the 106th Congress (1999–2001)
through the end of Clinton’s presidency.
After 40 years of Democratic rule, the Republican majority in the
Congress during most of Clinton’s term in office appeared at the time
to be a welcome sight. But because the presidency eluded them, the
Republicans seemed to have an excuse for not rolling back the welfare
state, even though it is the legislative branch that passes all legisla-
tion—not the executive branch. And besides, Clinton made a good
scapegoat. Then, if only for a brief moment, it appeared finally to be
official—there was an absolute Republican majority in the House, a
50–50 split in the Senate with a Republican vice president to break ties,
and a Republican president in the White House. But when Jim Jeffords,
the Republican senator from Vermont, switched from being a Republi-
can to being an Independent on May 24, 2001, the Republican majority
fizzled, giving the GOP another excuse.
But then, no more excuses. The 108th Congress, which took office
in January of last year, was solidly Republican. But since the Republi-
cans have gained control of the Congress, the federal budget (over $2
trillion) and the federal deficit (over $500 billion) are the highest ever,
the national debt is over $7 trillion (and increasing an average of $2
billion per day), hundreds of Americans have died on foreign soil, and
Americans have even less liberty now than they had before. This time,
however, the Republicans have no excuses. The lame excuse that they
are not responsible because they didn’t control the entire government
will not work anymore. And the even lamer excuse that the defection
of Vermont Sen. Jim Jeffords so early in Bush’s presidency didn’t give
the Republican majority enough time to do anything won’t work either.
The Republicans have now had total control—an absolute
Republican majority—for more than a year. And what did they do
during this time? The usual—nothing. No egregious legislation was
THE REVOLUTION THAT WASN’T 7
repealed. The welfare state was not rolled back an inch. No federal
programs or departments were eliminated. No budgets were cut. In fact,
legislation got worse (the USA PATRIOT Act), the welfare state was
strengthened (a new prescription drug plan), and a new federal
department was created (Homeland Security). So now that the initial
euphoria over an absolute Republican majority has subsided and the
Republicans have been in charge for a year, the Republican record can
be soberly addressed.
There is only one way to describe the record of the Republican
majority during its first year: a dismal failure. To students of political
history, however, this was not only no surprise, it was to be expected
and, in fact, predictable on the basis of the actions of the Republican
Party in the 20th century, whether they held the presidency, the House,
the Senate, or any combination of the three, including an absolute
majority. Because the history of the Republican Party is one of
compromise after compromise and sellout after sellout, there are a
number of things that a Republican majority has not meant, and in fact,
will never mean.
Republican Sellouts
A Republican majority has not meant any more than it did the last
time the Republicans controlled both the Congress and the Oval Office,
since the intent of Republicans is not to dismantle the welfare state with
its entitlements and income-transfer programs. The 83rd Congress of
1953–1955, which had the advantage of serving under the Republican
president Dwight Eisenhower, represented the last time in recent
memory that the Republicans commanded both houses of Congress and
the White House. Before then, it was during the first two years of
Herbert Hoover’s presidency that a Republican Congress convened
under a Republican president. With the Republican Eisenhower in the
White House, and a Republican majority in Congress, one would think
that the entire New Deal could have been repealed and the government
restored to at least its pre-New Deal levels. Yet during this period, the
Bricker Amendment to protect U.S. sovereignty went down in defeat,
the Cold War took shape, and the judicial activist Earl Warren was
appointed to the Supreme Court. This Republican majority was
8 THE REVOLUTION THAT WASN’T
short-lived, as the voters turned out the Republicans for what was to be
the longest tenure of one-party rule in U.S. history.
A Republican majority has not meant anything different from the
last time a Republican Congress had to contend with a Democratic
president, because the Republicans have no desire to rid the country of
affirmative-action policies, anti-discrimination laws, or anything else
granting special privileges based on race, sex, perceived victim status,
disability, or “sexual orientation.” Before the Clinton regime, the last
time a Republican Congress found itself in this position was during the
80th Congress of 1947–1949, which assembled during the second half
of the first term of the Democrat Harry Truman. One would have to go
back to the last half of Woodrow Wilson’s second term to find a like
occurrence. It is apparent that a Republican majority in Congress for
the first time since the New Deal would at least have been able to block
the legislative agenda of Harry Truman. But ability and willingness are
two different things. After authorizing $400 million in aid to Greece
and Turkey in 1947 and the $17 billion Marshall Plan in 1948, the
Republicans in Congress were still replaced by Democrats in the next
election.
A Republican majority has not meant anything different from the
last time the Republicans held a majority in the Senate, because the
practice of appointing and confirming judges and bureaucrats who
trample the Constitution and infringe the liberties of American citizens
has never abated. Throughout Ronald Reagan’s first term, and for the
first half of his second one, the Republicans had a majority in the
Senate under a Republican president. The only other two times this
century that this occurred were during the terms of Hoover and William
Taft. Although not possessing a majority in the House of Representa-
tives, with a majority in the Senate, and the most conservative president
since Calvin Coolidge, the repeal of Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society
seemed within reach. Some good was done during the period of this
Senate majority, but Sandra Day O’Connor, who proved to be a dismal
failure to conservatives, was installed on the Supreme Court. The
Social Security tax rates were also gradually raised throughout this
period, something that cannot be blamed exclusively on a
Democratic-controlled House. Further compromise with the Democrats
resulted in additional “tax reform.” A Republican House was never
THE REVOLUTION THAT WASN’T 9
The Solution
positive for liberty, and will never do so, until they undertake a
systematic dismantling of the welfare, regulatory, interventionist state.
It is not just a matter of enacting more legislation to combat 40 years
of Democratic rule. Limiting spending increases to the rate of inflation
is not satisfactory. A balanced-budget amendment is not the answer.
Indexing taxes on capital gains to inflation is not the solution. A freeze
on federal spending is not enough. Welfare and Social Security reform
are not needed. More crime bills will not do. It is pointless to argue that
the Republicans will feed the federal leviathan less than the Democrats.
Instead of slaying the federal leviathan, bipartisanship, sellout, and
compromise will ensure that a Republican majority feeds it instead.
Unless the emphasis is on the elimination of all facets of the federal
monstrosity, including the repeal of the New Deal of FDR, the Fair
Deal of Harry Truman, the Great Society programs of LBJ, the
blunders of Republican presidents, and the sellouts of Republican
Congresses, a Republican majority will never mean anything positive
for freedom.
Ultimately, the solution lies in the hands of the American people.
The libertarian principles of the Founders, and especially the limited
role of government in a free society, should be on the lips of every
American. It is then, and only then, that elected representatives can
begin to eliminate the funding and power of the FDA, FTC, EEOC,
OSHA, EPA, HHS, HUD, BATF, CPB, NEA, IRS, and all the other
acronyms that rob the American people of their money, property, and
liberty.
_______
The latest “Conservative Index” that has just been published by The
New American, (a biweekly publication of The John Birch Society), is
an eye-opener for those who think that the Republicans in Congress are
“conservative.” The index once again refutes the myth, based on the
voting records of Republicans in Congress, that the Republican Party
is the party of “conservatism.”
The “Conservative Index,” according to The New American, “rates
congressmen based on their adherence to constitutional principles of
limited government, to fiscal responsibility, to national sovereignty,
THE REVOLUTION THAT WASN’T 11
and Sean Hannity who are wasting their votes by voting Republi-
can—not conservative and libertarian critics of the Republican Party
who vote for a third party or not at all.
_______
The year 2000 Platform of the Republican Party implied that the
Republican Party was the party that held the supposedly conservative
ideas of fiscal responsibility and smaller government:
Nothing could be further from the truth, for as has been documented,
the idea that the Republican Party is the party of conservatism is a
myth. The Republican Party has always been the party of big govern-
ment, plunder, and sellouts. A look at the “four years growth” of the
federal government under the presidency of George Bush confirms and
amplifies these facts.
The Republicans gained control of the Congress in the third year
of Clinton’s first term. They had complete control of the 104th
Congress (1995–1997), held on to control in the 105th Congress
(1997–1999), and remained in power during the 106th Congress
(1999–2001) through the end of Clinton’s presidency. After George
14 THE REVOLUTION THAT WASN’T
The federal debt is the total of all the deficits and surpluses that the
federal government runs each year. The daily change in the debt can be
seen on the website of the Treasury Department’s Bureau of the Public
Debt. At the time of Bush’s first inauguration in 2001, the federal debt
stood at $5,727,776,738,304.64. At the time of his second inauguration
on January 20, 2005, the federal debt stood at $7,613,772,338,689.34.
Thus, the federal debt increased almost $2 trillion under the first four
years of Bush’s reign. The federal debt at the end of the last three fiscal
years is as follows:
The interest expense for the first three months of FY 2005 (Oct., Nov.,
& Dec.) was $120,248,160,823.07. The interest expense on this
massive debt is the third largest expense in the federal budget.
they were scaled down considerably. But what about the other
departments? What did we do in this country without a Department of
Education until 1979? Were people not being educated properly until
then? Is it the job of the government to provide health and human
services? Is it the job of the government to oversee housing and urban
development? And to those who say that we need the new Department
of Homeland Security to defend us from terrorist attacks, I say: What
about the Department of Defense? If U.S. troops were not scattered all
over the globe then perhaps they might be able to guard our borders,
patrol our coasts, and defend us from terrorist attacks.
And then there are the numerous federal agencies and commissions.
Here is the official list from the White House “Federal Agencies and
Commissions” website:
Are all these agencies and commissions necessary? Are any of them
constitutional? Most Americans have probably never even heard of half
of them.
Conclusion
This brief look at the four years growth of the federal budget,
deficit, debt, and bureaucracy shows without a doubt that a Republican
president and a Republican Congress cannot be trusted to roll back the
welfare/warfare state even one-tenth of an inch. Given their track
record, you can count on them to increase it substantially during the
next four years. Never, never, never trust any document written by the
Republican Party or anything that comes out of the mouth of any
Republican president, congressman, or politician about reducing the
size and scope of government. And yes, the same thing goes for the
Democrats.
George Bush was right when he said a few years ago: “The
American people have been overcharged for Government, and they
deserve a refund.” The only problem with his statement is that it is now
Bush and the Republicans who have overcharged the American people
for government, and there is no refund in sight.
_______
THE REVOLUTION THAT WASN’T 23
conservatism, the benefits of the free market, and the need for less
government intervention in the economy and society, the increasing
Republican majority in both houses of Congress can only be counted
on to further increase the size and scope of government. This, of
course, comes as no surprise, since the history of the Republican Party
is one of compromise after compromise and sellout after sellout.
Is the Republican Party the party of conservatism? Sure, Republi-
cans can talk a good conservatism, especially when it comes time for
an election. But real conservatives need to wake up: Republicans are
now not only proudly embracing New Deal- and Great Society-like
programs—they are expanding them at record levels. Conservative
Christians likewise need to open their eyes: The Republican Party is not
the salvation of America—how hard is it to position oneself to the right
of the Democratic Party? As I said on another occasion: The Republi-
can Party is not the lesser of two evils, it is pure evil, just like the
Democratic Party.
If you ignore Republican campaign rhetoric about how they are for
free markets and limited government, and focus on Republican
performance, it is readily apparent that the old adage is true now more
than ever: there is not a dime’s worth of difference between the two
major parties.
_______
1981–1987.
After forty years of being out of power, a revolution was certainly
in order. True, the Republicans did not yet also control the White
House as they did during the 83rd Congress when Dwight Eisenhower
was president, but it is Congress that writes the laws, not the president.
And unlike the Congress under Eisenhower, which reverted to
Democratic rule in the next election, the Republican control of the
Congress under Bill Clinton continued unabated through the end of his
second term.
When what looked like a Republican revolution seemed to stagnate
under Clinton, excuses began to be made for the fact that the Republi-
cans were acting like anything but the conservatives who voted them
into office. Republican control of the White House, we were told, and
a larger Republican majority in Congress, were needed to complete the
revolution. After all, Clinton could veto any bills passed by a Republi-
can Congress, and the Republicans did not have a veto-proof majority.
It turns out that in eight years Clinton only vetoed seventeen bills,
making Republican fears unfounded.
And then came George W. Bush.
Republicans were ecstatic. A Republican president was once again
elected. This time, however, things were different. When George Bush
was inaugurated in 2001, he had a Republican-
controlled Congress. This is something a Republican president had not
had for forty-five years. The millennium was now here. The Republican
revolution was now ready to be completed.
Enter Jim Jeffords.
The Republican controlled 107th Congress (2001–2003) had a
weak link: the Senate. Jeffords was a Republican senator from
Vermont. Early in Bush’s first term, Senator Jeffords switched from
Republican to Independent, changing the 50/50 balance of power in the
Senate. Although the House remained in Republican hands, those hands
were tied, so we were told, because the Republicans no longer
controlled the Senate. The Republicans always seem to have an excuse.
Big government, intrusive government—it is always the fault of those
evil Democrats.
But then, finally, no more excuses. The midterm elections of 2002
gave us a new Congress (the 108th, 2003–2005) that was once again
solidly Republican. This gave the Republicans an absolute majority for
THE REVOLUTION THAT WASN’T 27
the last two years of Bush’s first term. This scenario was confirmed by
Bush’s reelection and the further increase of the Republican majority
in the 109th Congress. Republicans could no longer blame everything
on the Democrats like they did for so long before they gained their
absolute majority.
So, now that the Republicans have controlled the House since
1995, now that the Republicans have controlled the Senate for the same
period except for about a year and a half, now that a Republican
president has been elected and reelected, and now that we have had
several years of an absolute Republican majority, a simple question
needs to be asked: What Republican revolution?
Jacob Hornberger, the president of the Future of Freedom Founda-
tion, recently asked some pertinent questions about the Republicans:
The answer to every question is, of course, a big fat zero. No egregious
legislation was repealed, and the welfare/warfare state is bigger and
more intrusive than ever. Some revolution.
Although many Republicans who claim to believe in a limited
government can talk a good conservatism, especially when it comes
time for an election, one statistic is all it takes to see that there has been
no limit to the growth of government under the Republican Party.
On the eve of the new Republican-controlled Congress in 1995, the
national debt was just under $5 trillion. At the time of Bush’s first
inauguration in 2001, the national debt stood at $5,727,776,738,304.64.
At the time of his second inauguration in 2005, the national debt stood
at $7,613,772,338,689.34. On the day of the recent midterm elections,
the national debt was up to $8,592,561,542,263.30.
The Republican revolution is a failure, a dismal failure. Despite the
Republican rhetoric about the virtues of conservatism, the benefits of
the free market, and the need for less government intervention in the
economy and society, the Republican majority in both houses of
28 THE REVOLUTION THAT WASN’T
Congress did nothing but further increase the size and scope of
government.
This, of course, comes as no surprise, since the history of the
Republican Party is not one of real conservatism at all; it is the history
of interventionism, big government, the welfare state, the warfare state,
plunder, compromises, and sellouts, as Clyde Wilson and Thomas
DiLorenzo have showed us in great detail.
Those who voted for a third party candidate for Congress in the
recent election are not the ones who wasted their vote. Republicans
who voted for Republican candidates hoping that “this time” perhaps
the performance of the Republicans might improve are the ones who
wasted their vote. Conservatives who, against their better judgment,
voted Republican because they feared what would happen if the
“liberals” were in control, wasted their vote on a party that deserved to
lose. Evangelical Christians who held their nose and voted Republican
because they thought they were choosing the lesser of two evils not
only wasted their vote, but are sadly mistaken.
Do I celebrate the Democratic victory in the midterm elections for
Congress? Hardly. The socialist and statist policies of the Democratic
Party are well known, but at least Democrats are usually honest about
being advocates of bigger government and increased government
intervention instead of masquerading as advocates of smaller and less
intrusive government like the hypocritical Republicans do.
It is too bad that the Republicans did not at least win control of the
Senate (the Senate is now 49 Democrats, 49 Republicans, and 2 liberal
Independents). It is great to have gridlock between a Democratic
Congress and a Republican president, but it is better to have gridlock
between the House and Senate as well. We can only hope and pray that
this government comes to a grinding halt—for the sake of the liberties
of the American people.
_______
ICHABOD!
“And she named the child Ichabod, saying, The glory is departed
from Israel: because the ark of God was taken, and because of her
father in law and her husband.” ~ 1 Samuel 4:21
It’s done, it’s over, it’s official: The Republican Party nominated
John McCain to be its 2008 presidential candidate. Conversely, and
more importantly, this means that the Republican Party failed to
nominate Ron Paul to be its 2008 presidential candidate.
THE REVOLUTION THAT WASN’T 31
T.G.I.F.
The Republican Revolution has been gasping for breath since the
Democratic Party won the congressional midterm elections in 2006.
After the Republicans were soundly defeated in the 2008 elections, the
Revolution was in its death throes until noon on January 20 when
George Bush’s second term as president ceased and the Republican
Revolution officially came to an end.
Thank God it’s finished.
The Republican Revolution began on January 3, 1995, after the
Republican Party had won control of both houses of Congress for the
first time since the 83rd Congress (1953–1955) under Dwight Eisen-
hower. Although a Democrat (Bill Clinton) occupied the White House
for the remainder of the decade, the Republicans hung on to the House
and Senate until the election of a Republican president (George Bush)
in the year 2000 gave them an absolute majority.
The Revolution had reached its zenith. Republicans were ecstatic.
THE REVOLUTION THAT WASN’T 33