The Red Tandem: Conservative Republicans and Socialism in Contemporary America By Michael Espinoza Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Institute of the Americas Faculty of Social & Historical Sciences University College London Declaration I, Michael Espinoza, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. Signed: Date: 11 April 2016 2 Abstract This thesis is an analysis of contemporary American political history, examining conservative Republican rhetoric as it relates to polarisation, four-party politics and a governing philosophy. In particular, it analyses conservative Republican rhetoric and the strong emphasis associated with the socialist label, especially how the socialist label is employed as a critique against the New Deal and its ongoing political legacy – the modern American welfare state. I compare the difference in how conservative Republicans employ the socialist label in the context of being the majority party, as well as of being the minority party. I utilise James MacGregor Burns’ original four-party politics argument and reorganise it in order to best explain American domestic politics in the post-Cold War era – separating the Republican presidential party from its congressional party. The thesis examines how conservative Republican rhetoric is strategic. It is effective at casting a negative light on the opposition, but creates a false impression of a conservative Republican governing philosophy. Conservative Republican rhetoric is strongest when it opposes something, usually big government in some way, such as opposing national health care reform. On the other hand, once conservative Republicans are in a position of power, they have to scale back their anti- statist rhetoric so that it leads to lasting accomplishments, instead of railing against government and shirking the responsibilities of governing. This involves a combination of pragmatism and ideology – which becomes harder to achieve as the GOP moves further rightward. Conservative Republican rhetoric has evolved over time from its original libertarian economic-centred argument against the New Deal. In the post-Cold War era, this rhetoric still draws on the “less government” economic argument, whilst also calling for more government intervention on socio-moral issues. 3 Acknowledgements There are two individuals who deserve my utmost thanks: my supervisor Professor Iwan Morgan, and my wife Caitlin Espinoza. Without them, completing this thesis would not have been possible. To Iwan, your guidance throughout the entire PhD process has been invaluable. And without your infinite knowledge of American political history (and yes of course, taxes and deficits), I would not have made it this far. I will forever be in your debt. To Cait, I love you more than you know. You have spent more time reading my many drafts along the way than I am sure you ever imagined was possible. You have been my sounding board and crutch throughout the entire process. You mean everything to me. I have the rest of my life to repay all you have done and sacrificed for me. I also want to thank my parents and the rest of my family (this also includes my in-laws) for listening to me (and Cait) talk about my thesis for the last four years. And of course, any faults in this thesis are my own. I would like dedicate this thesis to my daughter, Valentina Margaret Espinoza. I will love you forever. 4 Table of Contents Declaration……………………………………………………………………………………2 Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………….3 Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………………...4 Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………………......5 Introduction – The Red Tandem…………………………………………………………...7 Chapter One Honing Their Message: Conservative Republicans and the Socialist Label…………...57 Chapter Two The New Deal Legacy at a Standstill? Clashing Narratives on Big Government…….113 Chapter Three The Rollback of the New Deal Legacy? Welfare Reform in the 104th Congress……...144 Chapter Four Four-Party Politics and the Legacy of George W. Bush……………………………….180 Chapter Five “Red Fascism”? Obama’s First Term: Healthcare, the Tea Party and the Role of Government…………………………………………………………………………….....213 5 Conclusion – Unfinished Business: Conservative Republicans and the New Deal Legacy……………………………………………………………………………………..252 Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………….266 Primary………………………………………………………………..266-282 Secondary……………………………………………………………..282-314 6 Introduction – The Red Tandem Under the tousled boyish haircut [of JFK] it is still old Karl Marx – first launched a century ago. There is nothing new in the idea of government being Big Brother to us all. Hitler called his “State Socialism” and way before him it was “benevolent monarchy”. -Ronald Reagan1 The America in which we grew up is vastly different from the America the secular-socialist Left want to create. And that's why saving America is the fundamental challenge of our time. The secular-socialist machine represents as great a threat to America as Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union once did. -Newt Gingrich2 In contemporary America, conservative Republicans have used the socialist label to smear and discredit Democrats in an attempt to portray the Republican Party as the defenders of American values, all whilst accusing Democrats of pursuing un-American goals that will undermine these ideals. They use specific rhetoric in order to construct their argument against Democrats, and to bolster their assertions that the terms Democrat, liberal and socialist are interchangeable. The opening quotations by Gingrich and Reagan demonstrate the overall critique that conservative Republicans employ against liberal Democrats. They consider them to be socialists, whilst equating all socialists with Nazis. Both quotations reflect a longstanding belief that the “Red Fascism” of Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia were similar forms of totalitarianism. Many Americans considered both the Nazis and the Soviets to be one and the same during the 1930s, whilst during World War II, Germany became the focus of American enmity, and in the Cold War-era the Soviet Union became the sole enemy.3 A growing trend 1Reagan wrote this remark in a letter to Richard Nixon on 15 July 1960. Taken from: Kiron K. Skinner, Annelise Anderson and Martin Anderson, eds., Reagan: A Life in Letters (New York: Free Press, 2003), 705. 2Newt Gingrich, To Save America: Stopping Obama's Secular-Socialist Machine (Washington, DC: Regnery, 2010), 4. 3For more, see: Les Adler and Thomas Paterson, “Red Fascism: The Merger of Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia in the American Image of Totalitarianism, 1930’s-1950’s”, The American Historical Review 75, no. 4 (April 1970): 1046-1064, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1852269 (accessed 24 September 2011). 7 in the post-Cold War era, however, has been to state that all Democrats are liberals – as well as being socialists. But why is this case? According to political scientist Terence Ball, the use of the "socialist” label has intensified during the Obama presidency because "the `L' word (liberal) has lost it[s] shock value".4 Another view is that of conservative scholar Steven F. Hayward who asserts: If we understand socialism in its strict definition — central economic planning and public ownership of the means of production — then the president [Obama] is obviously not a socialist (with a mild caveat for the auto bailouts, the banks, etc). But if we step back a moment and consider “socialism” more broadly as a step increase in political control of or intervention in the economy — whether it be through a revival of Keynesian-style stimulus and things like “cash for clunkers” subsidies, or through a government semi-takeover of the health care sector — then the charge appears more salient.5 On the other hand, historian Andrew Hartman states: “In short, lumping socialism together with all things liberal has a long history. It’s no surprise that such rhetoric has not gone the way of the cold war” [emphasis added].6 But what has changed in the post-Cold War era is the makeup of the political parties, transforming how the socialist label can be used against a Democratic Party that no longer has a conservative wing. 4The quotation is from: David Crary, “Obama 'Socialist' Claim Persists On Right Despite Inaccuracies”, Associated Press, 4 June 2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/04/obama-socialist-claim- history_n_1568470.html (accessed 4 March 2014). 5The quotation is from: The Editors, “What Is Socialism in 2009”? New York Times blog, 14 September 2009, http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/14/what-is-socialism-in-2009/ (accessed 27 May 2014). 6Ibid. John White, however, argues the opposite – the rhetoric did go away because the end of the Cold War removed the fear of the red label. For more, consult: John Kenneth White, Still Seeing Red: How the Cold War Shapes the New American Politics, updated and expanded ed. (Boulder: Westview Press, 1998), 199- 285. 8 My Contribution to the Field The key question I set out to address is: Is the socialist label strategic rhetoric or is it merely part of conservative Republican vernacular? I also examine two secondary questions, which are: 1. What is the relationship between rhetoric, polarisation and “four-party politics”? 2. Do conservative Republicans have a governing philosophy, or is their anti-statist rhetoric creating a misrepresentation of what can be accomplished versus an entrenched New Deal state? My methodology comprises