Wes Vernon, NewsMax.com
Friday, Jan. 23, 2004

Those words from moderator William Murray of Government Is Not God PAC summed up the ambivalent hot-and-cold attitude toward the Bush administration at this annual gathering of the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC).

At a panel discussion titled “GOP Success: Is it Destroying the Conservative Movement?,” Donald Devine, of the American Conservatvie Union Foundation and a onetime high official in the Reagan administration, said that President Bush was the all-time big spender on discretionary items, things not required by the statutes, the part of the budget that supposedly most closely reflects an administration’s spending priorities.

Others were quick to point out that a president can’t spend a dime not authorized and appropriated by Congress.

Which Party Is Which?

Devine told the audience of thousands attending the conference that Ronald Reagan reduced discretionary spending by 2 percent, Jimmy Carter boosted it by only 2 percent, Bill Clinton raised spending by 2.4 percent, President G.H.W. Bush by 4 percent, Lyndon Johnson by 4.3 percent, Richard Nixon by 6.8 percent, Gerald Ford by 8 percent, and the all-time high with George W. Bush coming in at 8.5 percent.

For all their complaints, the conservatives gathered here will acknowledge that, as Devine put it, “Is it better than the Democrats? Yes, but ...” The “Yes, but” typifies the caveats in the minds of these people who are conservatives first and Republicans second.

(Hardly any conservative is a Democrat anymore. Sen. Zell Miller, D-Ga., attracts much attention because his conservatism is so unusual in his party. He is, of course, about to retire.)

The “Yes, but” is usually followed by – again quoting Devine – “We’re not going in the right direction.”

Successes and Failures

Just prior to the panel discussion, the audience heard from Ken Mehlman, the Bush-Cheney campaign manager for 2004, who listed the conservative successes of the Bush White House. Tax cuts, pursuit of the war on terror, wartime leadership, rejecting the job-destroying and China-boosting Kyoto “global warming” treaty, turning down U.S. participation in the sovereignty-threatening International Criminal Court, and signing the bill against partial-birth abortion.

Still, here are those steps “in the wrong direction”: the huge prescription drug entitlement, the massive farm bill, the big-spending education bill, and Bush’s immigration package – which, by the way, has elicited very little comment at this conference for two days, though a panel discussion on that topic was slated for Saturday.

White House Stifles Congressional Conservatism

White House pressure on Republicans in Congress has resulted in fewer conservative votes on Capitol Hill.

Devine notes that only two GOP House members had a 100 percent conservative voting record in 2003, according to ACU's score card. The previous low was 25. In 2002, 60 Republican congressmen scored a perfect record. Usually sbout 40 House GOP members score at least 90 percent or more. This past year, only eight did so.

Laments the ACU Foundation official, “Our Republican Party is not voting conservative, regardless of what they say back home.”

Rep. Tom Feeney, R-Fla., one of the 25 Republicans to vote against the president’s prescription drug program, bemoaned “neo-con” influence at the Bush White House. “Neo-con” is a term for former liberals whose revulsion over the 1960s counter culture and its softeness toward the Soviet Union during the Cold War led them to join conservative movements while maintaining their endorsement of big government.

Gary Aldrich of the Patrick Henry Center, a former FBI agent who made waves a few years ago with his expose of Clinton White House scandals, told the CPAC attendees that Ronald Reagan, when he was in the White House, would listen politely to advice from neo-cons, pat them on the head, and “send them packing.”

Mark Mix of National Right to Work complained that in preparing for the election campaign, the Bush administration was trying to “buy off its opposition” with big-spending government programs.

Bottom line, though, is that none of these panelists appeared ready to bolt. They believe Democrats are far worse, and the president has done some good things, as mentioned above, that no Democrat running for his job would ever have done. Still, the enthusiasm is only partial.

Editor's note:
FREE e-mail alerts from NewsMax.com – click here now!

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
2004 Elections
RNC