Kinder, Gentler Bush Helps GOP

“We will prove that someone who is conservative and compassionate can win without sacrificing principle.” So proclaimed Texas Gov. George W. Bush in his debut speech on the presidential campaign trail on June 12. The GOP front-runner devoted no fewer than 13 paragraphs to what it means to be a compassionate conservative. “I welcome the label,” he declared. “And on this ground I’ll take my stand.”

But what does “compassionate conservative” really mean?

For liberal Democrats, the label is an oxymoron. That’s not surprising for those who tend to evaluate a public official’s compassion based on how much of other people’s money he or she is willing to tax and give away. Democratic operatives are no doubt scouring Bush’s gubernatorial record, particularly his vetoes, for examples of “cruel and heartless” cuts that lack such compassion. They will find plenty.

For the hardened right, Bush’s self-portrait as a compassionate conservative is seen as an unwelcome diversion. They see Bush sending the press and pundits off on a wild goose chase in search of what it means to be a compassionate conservative in order to duck the real question: “Is he really a conservative at all?” The suspicions of hard-line conservatives have only been furthered as they have learned more about the governor’s positions in support of immigration, affirmative action and free trade with China--not to mention what they see as an effort to have it both ways on the abortion question.

But for many mainstream conservative Republicans, Bush’s introduction of compassionate conservatism into the presidential sweepstakes, as vague as it may be, could not have come at a better time. There’s nothing the party needs more right now than a revitalization of its message and vision.

With few exceptions, Bush’s policy agenda is standard GOP fare. What is refreshing is his effort to link it to a loftier purpose. He sees no reason why Republicans should cede ground to Democrats when it comes to educating and protecting children, lifting up the poor or bringing minorities into the mainstream. By combining carefully constrained government involvement, massive voluntary action and strong leadership, Bush believes America can be made a better society and the GOP a more successful party. Republicans can thus get off the defensive when it comes to whose philosophy does the greatest good for the greatest number.

Bush’s approach has solidified his conservative credentials as he prepares to face right-leaning voters in GOP primaries while also distinguishing himself from the “angry white men” who fairly or unfairly came to embody the Republican Party for many Americans during the Clinton impeachment proceedings. It’s a deft act of political positioning that should reassure anxious party elders that “Bush-the-younger” is ready for prime time.

Conservative Republicans are right to be concerned that in going forward, compassionate conservatism does not metamorphose into a wishy-washy, middle-of-the-road Republicanism that attempts to play “me too” with the Democrats on their home turf of expanded federal involvement in every issue. Yet just as Ronald Reagan’s infectious congeniality gave him cover to pursue bold conservative policies, in the right hands the cloak of compassionate conservatism can perform a similar function.

Look no further than this past week when Bush issued a frontal assault on family planning orthodoxy by announcing that as president he would significantly redirect federal funds from contraception programs to abstinence education and encourage faith-based organizations to compete for such funding. Delivered by Gary Bauer, Pat Buchanan or Dan Quayle, such a message would be dismissed as the latest rant from the right-wing fringe. But defined in the context of compassionate conservatism, the idea gains credibility and boldness.

Indeed, despite its fuzziness as a policy platform and limitations as a governing credo, compassionate conservatism offers fresh direction for a dispirited and disorganized GOP. Regardless of the outcome for Bush, he has pointed the party to its own “third way”--neither hard-right righteousness nor middle-of-the-road mushiness but conservatism that is positive and relevant. If nothing else, Bush is helping Republicans relearn a lesson from Reagan: Conservatism with a smile has far greater appeal than conservatism with a snarl.