DOCSLIB.ORG

The John Birch Society's Weekly, New American

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

How Coors Family Philanthropy Undermines Democratic Pluralism RUSS BELLANT South End Press Boston, MA A Political Research Associates Bcx>k Political Research Associates 678 Massachusetts Avenue, Suite 205, Cambridge, MA 02139 (617) 661-9313 Political Research Associates is an independent research institute which collects and disseminates information on right-wing political groups and trends. Centralized in its archives is a continuously-updated collection of over one hundred right-wing publications, including newspapers, magazines, newsletters, and direct mail appeals. The institute's library contains hundreds of volumes relating to the political right wing. Also maintained are extensive files of primary and secondary material on individuals, groups, and topics of interest to those researching the right wing. Political Research Associates offers classes on the American right wing, provides speakers for groups and conferences, publishes educational posters, and prepares, on request, specific research repl)rts l)n topics pertaining to the pl1litical right wing. The Political Research Associates T apical Report Series, co-published with South End Press, prl1vides background infllrmatiL1n Lln subjects Llf current interest tLl chose interested in understanding the right wing in the United States. Political Research Associates Srnff: Jean V. Hardisty, DiRECTOR Chip Berlet, ANALYST Margaret Quigley, RESEARCHER/ARCHIVIST Copyright© by Russ Bellant 1988, 1991 Any properly footnoted quotation of up to 500 sequential words may be used without permission, so long as the total number of words does not exceed 2,000. For longer quotations or for a greater number of total words, authors should write to South End Press for permission. IO 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 I Design, production & type by dg graphics Cover design by David Gerratt Cover photograph by Deborah Bright Manufactured in the USA Support for this report was provided by The Funding Exchange/National Community Funds, and many individual donors. UBRAR Y OF CONGRESS CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA Bellant, Russ, I949- The Coors connection: how Coors family philanthropy undermines democratic pluralism/ by Russ Bellant. - 2nd ed. p. cm. "A Political Research Associates Book." Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-89608-417-5 (cloth): $25.00. - ISBN 0-89608-416-7 (paper): $9.00 I. Conservatism-United States-History-20th century. 2. Coors family-Poliucal activity. 3. United States-Politics and government-1945- I. Political Research Associates. II. Title. E839.5.B4 3 1991 320.5'2'0973-<lc20 9I-JS24 CIP South End Press, 116 St. Botolph St., Boston, MA 02115 ·C@;>- ' L I' ii The New Right feeds 011 discontent, anger, insecurity, and rese11tn1e11t, and flourishes 011 backlash politics. Through its i11terlocki11g network, it seeks to veto whatever it perceives to threaten its way of life-busing, wo1ne11 's liberation, gay rights, pomogrophy, loss ofthe Pono1na Co11al -and promotes o beefed-up defense budget, lower taxes, and reduced federal regulotio11 ofs1nall business . ... ii The New Right network suppo!ts whoever shares its desire for radical politico/ change and its resentments ofthe status quo. As such, the New Right is anything but conservative . ... ii 1/ze reploce111e11t [in 1979 of the] choin11a11 of the A111erico11 Conserootive Union was a reflection of 011 otte111pt by traditio110/ conservatives within the lVnshi11gto11, D.C., area to 111i11i111ize the influence of 1Vew Right leaders like Colorado brew:er Joseph Coors, his lVoshi11gto11 politico/ operative Paul lVtJ•rich, andf1111draiser Richard Viguerie . ... 1/ze otte111pt by New Right lenders to control the orgo11izatio11 con be traced to Coors' decision i11 1971 to bankroll right-fi!,·ing organizations." Alan Crawford Th1111drr 011 rhr RiKhf 1980 Ill ----------- PREFACE BY CHIP BERLET oors family philanthropy aims a financial silver bullet at the heart of Cdemocratic pluralism in the United States. The Coors family members have financed an interlocking network of ultra-conservative and far-right institutions which have gained respectability during the past decade. Few average citizens have read even a tiny portion of the mountain of literature produced by these rightist groups. Some who have acquainted themselves with these writings and their conclusions, however, have been horrified at the narrow and spiteful view of America and Americans enunciated by these zealous ideologues. Those who have benefited, directly and indirectly, from Coors family generosity include persons whose views reflect not only traditional conser­ vatism, but also nativism, xenophobia, theories of racial superiority, sexism, homophobia, authoritarianism, militarism, reaction, and in some cases out­ right neo-fascism. These charges may seem shocking, but consider that Holly and Jeffrey Coors serve on the national board of the rightist Council for National Policy along with a former Ku Klux Klan leader and others who championed segregationist policies. In one notable case, a Coors-funded New Right leader, Paul Weyrich, sponsors the work of a convicted Nazi collaborator, Laszlo Pasztor, a Hungarian-American who built a political network of persons and groups with fascist, racist, and anti-Semitic backgrounds. The Coors family comes to its political activis1n after having established a well-deserved reputation for aggressive (some would say cutthroat) busi­ ness acumen, 1nost visibly through the Coors brewery and its widely adver­ tised beers. That the Coors name apparently opens doors in Washington, D.C. was noted in the August 7, 1989 issue of Newsweek in an article on the v Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) scandal. Along with a picture of Joe Coors, Newsweek ran the caption: "After a letter to [HUD Secretary] Pierce from the conservative Colorado brewer, HUD approved more than $16 million in Denver rent subsidies that had seemed doomed." The Coors family members not only fund the New Right and Religious Right but also are identified by influential Republicans, ranking conservative congressional representatives, and key executive agency ap­ pointees as having personal clout in the electoral political arena. There are other powerful New Right funders. Richard Mellon Scaife, heir to the Mellon fortune, has funneled more than $8 million to the right­ wing Free Congress Foundation (FCF) through the Scaife and Carthage Foundations. Other major FCF funders include Robert H. Krieble, retired chairman and honorary director of the Loctite Corporation; Michael and Helen Valerio of the Papa Gino's restaurant chain; and Mr. and Mrs. Roger Milliken of Milliken & Company, makers of the trademarked Visa fabrics, a product featured in full-page, full-color advertisements in John Birch Soci­ ety publications. Yet it is the Coors family, primarily Joe, Holly, William, Jeffrey (and Peter at the Coors Foundation), who time and again appear in leadership roles in New Right institutions, offering a guiding hand along with their signed checks. The Coors family's seminal and continuing influence on the politics of the New Right and Religious Right is undeniable. They are among the most powerful bloc of New Right funders and leaders; and are seen as being in the front rank of U.S. conservative power brokers by critics and compatriots alike. With the thawing Cold War melting long-standing alliances among a variety of conservative and right-wing constituencies, the views of the major funders of the largest New Right institutions will to a large degree shape the nature of conservative and reactionary activism in the coming decades. To study the past actions and ideas of the Coors family provides an imperfect yet useful glimpse into the future of the U.S. political Right. At the same ti1ne, the influence of the Heritage Foundation and Free Congress Foundation, both of which represent and reflect the views of the Coors family in Washington, D.C., continues to remain strong. For in­ stance, both institutions helped coordinate the recruitment and selection of conservatives for political appointment by the Bush Administration, and a number of key Bush Administration appointees regularly correspond with and solicit advice from the FCF's Paul Weyrich. Yet there is another, more subtle reason to study the Coors family. With owners who are such unabashed defenders of an unfettered free enterprise economy, it is understandable that the Coors Corporation would seek to increase profits by promoting the increased sale of its beers to new consum- VI ers; and thus Coors has sought to develop new markets among women, African-Americans, Hispanics, gay men, and lesbians. Ironically, the Coors family uses their share of the beer sale profits to promote theories that would roll back the political and social gains made in the past thirty years by persons in these same social groups. The Coors beer label displays a vivid example of this irony-a symbol certifying that Coors is a Kosher product. Many potential critics of the policies promulgated and promoted by the Coors family members seem mesmerized by the positive images projected in the slick Coors Corporation advertising campaigns. In this report, Mr. Bellant demonstrates the dramatic divergence between Coors corporate imagery and Coors family ideology as reflected by the family's funding of rightist networks. While the Coors Corporation press office tells reporters that Coors family funding of rightists is all in the past, the fact is that these funding patterns are both longstanding and ongoing. Joe Coors, the ideological leader of the Coors clan, is a latter-day Lone Ranger urging us to return once again to those glorious (if romanticized) days of yesteryear, where men were men and women's role was to deliver their healthy babies; where there was never any doubt as to what was good and what was evil; where minorities had the good sense to live within their God-imposed stereotypes, and godless heathens could be expeditiously dealt with because they had no souls. There is no question that Joe Coors is morivared by passionate patrio­ tism. The question is what price the majority of us in this country will have to pay in order for Joe Coors and his energetic family to realize their backward vision.
Recommended publications
  • Caspar Weinberger and the Reagan Defense Buildup

    Caspar Weinberger and the Reagan Defense Buildup

    The University of Southern Mississippi The Aquila Digital Community Dissertations Fall 12-2013 Direct Responsibility: Caspar Weinberger and the Reagan Defense Buildup Robert Howard Wieland University of Southern Mississippi Follow this and additional works at: https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations Part of the American Studies Commons, Military History Commons, Political History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Wieland, Robert Howard, "Direct Responsibility: Caspar Weinberger and the Reagan Defense Buildup" (2013). Dissertations. 218. https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations/218 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by The Aquila Digital Community. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of The Aquila Digital Community. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The University of Southern Mississippi DIRECT RESPONSIBILITY: CASPAR WEINBERGER AND THE REAGAN DEFENSE BUILDUP by Robert Howard Wieland Abstract of a Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate School Of The University of Southern Mississippi In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy December 2013 ABSTRACT DIRECT RESPONSIBILITY: CASPAR WEINBERGER AND THE REAGAN DEFENSE BUILDUP by Robert Howard Wieland December 2013 This dissertation explores the life of Caspar Weinberger and explains why President Reagan chose him for Secretary of Defense. Weinberger, not a defense technocrat, managed a massive defense buildup of 1.5 trillion dollars over a four year period. A biographical approach to Weinberger illuminates Reagan’s selection, for in many ways Weinberger harkens back to an earlier type of defense manager more akin to Elihu Root than Robert McNamara; more a man of letters than technocrat.
  • The University of Missouri Agriculture During the Reagan Years A

    The University of Missouri Agriculture During the Reagan Years A

    The University of Missouri Agriculture During the Reagan Years A Dissertation Submitted to The Faculty of the Department of History In Candidacy For The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Jay Ward Columbia, Missouri May 2015 Copyright 2015 by Jay Woodward Ward All rights reserved. The undersigned, appointed by the Dean of the Graduate School, have examined the dissertation entitled Agriculture During the Reagan Years Presented by Jay Woodward Ward In Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy And hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance. ______________________________________________________________________ Dr. Robert Collins ______________________________________________________________________ Dr. Mark Carroll ______________________________________________________________________ Dr. John Frymire _______________________________________________________________________ Dr. Catherine Rymph _______________________________________________________________________ Dr. Patrick Westhoff Dedication To Rose, Kelly, Brian, Janelle, Mickey, Lauren, Payton, Addison, Evelynne, and Gibson— the center of my world. Acknowledgements I owe undying gratitude to my advisor, Professor Robert M. Collins, who is a renowned scholar and an award-winning teacher, and without whose patient guidance I could not have completed this remarkable journey. I also want to thank my committee, Professor Mark Carroll, Professor John Frymire, Professor Catherine Rymph, and Professor Patrick Westhoff, all of whom lent me their considerable expertise and wisdom, but more importantly to me, they treated this very non-traditional student with extraordinary kindness. And my gratitude to my sister, Deborah Haseltine, my computer expert, who always was able to lead me out of the morasses into which I stumbled almost every time I sat down at the computer. ii Contents Acknowledgements ii List of Tables iv Introduction 1 Chapter 1. The Second Agricultural Revolution 20 Chapter 2.
  • Navy and Marine Corps Opposition to the Goldwater Nichols Act of 1986

    Navy and Marine Corps Opposition to the Goldwater Nichols Act of 1986

    Navy and Marine Corps Opposition to the Goldwater Nichols Act of 1986 A thesis presented to the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts Steven T. Wills June 2012 © 2012 Steven T. Wills. All Rights Reserved. 2 This thesis titled Navy and Marine Corps Opposition to the Goldwtaer Nichols Act of 1986 by STEVEN T. WILLS has been approved for the Department of History and the College of Arts and Sciences by Ingo Traushweizer Assistant Professor of History Howard Dewald Interim Dean, College of Arts and Sciences 3 ABSTRACT WILLS, STEVEN T., M.A., June 2012, History Navy and Marine Corps Opposition to the Goldwater Nichols Act of 1986 Director of Thesis: Ingo Traushweizer The Goldwater Nichols Act of 1986 was the most comprehensive defense reorganization legislation in a generation. It has governed the way the United States has organized, planned, and conducted military operations for the last twenty five years. It passed the Senate and House of Representatives with margins of victory reserved for birthday and holiday resolutions. It is praised throughout the U.S. defense establishment as a universal good. Despite this, it engendered a strong opposition movement organized primarily by Navy Secretary John F. Lehman but also included members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, prominent Senators and Congressman, and President Reagan's Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger. This essay will examine the forty year background of defense reform movements leading to the Goldwater Nichols Act, the fight from 1982 to 1986 by supporters and opponents of the proposed legislation and its twenty-five year legacy that may not be as positive as the claims made by the Department of Defense suggest.
  • How the State Department Betrays the Reagan Vision

    How the State Department Betrays the Reagan Vision

    484 January 31, 1986 RHETORIC VS. REALITY: HOW THE STATE DEPARTMENT BETRAYS THE REAGAN VISION INTRODUCTION President Ronald Reagan and Secretary of State George Shultz have articulated a welcome and long overdue foreign policy doctrine. They have said that the goal of freedom loving people should be to roll back Soviet gains, not merely Itcontain them.Il They have denied the validity of the doctrine enunciated by the late Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev that once a country becomes communist it can never leave the Soviet camp. The liberation of Grenada was vitally important to this new Reagan Doctrine because it was the first step in discrediting the Brezhnev Doctrine. There are today a number of national liberation movements attempting to overthrow Marxist regimes in countries of key strategic interest to the U.S. As with most indigenous revolutions, these are anti-colonialist in nature. They seek to'oust rulers installed by an outside power. Unlike insurgent uprisings of the past two decades, today's national liberation movements are anti-communist and threaten to topple Soviet colonial governments. This is an historic turn of events for the Free World, one that may mark the first stage in the unraveling of MOSCOW~S empire. Both Reagan and Shultz have said consistently that free people have a moral obligation to support indigenous and nationalist anti-communist resistance movements wherever they occur. Both have said that freedom and autonomy are not privileges limited to.the West. After five years, however, the Reagan Administrationls liberation rhetoric still bears little relationship to actual U.S. foreign policy.
  • Editorial Africa's Food Crisis: What Is to Be Done?

    Editorial Africa's Food Crisis: What Is to Be Done?

    1 Editorial Africa's Food Crisis: What is to be done? There is far more written about the nature, causes and effects of the agrarian crisis facing Africa than about possible solutions. Several contributions to this Issue attempt to shift the discussion to these matters of policy. Some critically review prescriptions that are on offer from the international agencies or in the literature: Bienefeld's polemic against neo-classical economics' answers to the general economic crisis that are shared by certain 'Marxists'; Gavin Williams' meticulous dismembering of what the World Bank prescribes for Nigeria's agriculture. One book review looks at the World Bank's view of Famine and the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation's master plan for African agriculture while another explores how far mechanisation can solve the problems of agriculture. Other articles offer critiques of actual policies in Somalia and Zimbabwe and present their own alternatives. Of course, even the growing mass of analyses of 'The Crisis' are often implicitly pointing to certain prognoses, for any specification of causes tends to simply 'appropriate' treatment. In this respect Bienefeld's contribution to a debate more general than that of the specifically agrarian crisis, starts at the right place in uncovering the shaky assumptions of the arguments that state intervention is the root of the problem and release of market forces the solution. He also challenges the factual evidence drawn from the experience of the Newly Industrialising Countries and the more specific and very selective African cases, on which this 'new orthodoxy' is premised. Although this is the main thrust of the piece, we anticipate, and hope, controversy will be provoked by his conclusion that both this establishment view and the cosy convergence with it of certain 'marxist' views about the progressive nature of capitalism in contemporary Africa have thrown aside some of the insights about medium term economic prospects and political tactics that dependency theory offers.
  • Read the Full PDF

    Read the Full PDF

    Chapter Title Preparing to Be President The Memos of Richard E. Neustadt Edited by Charles O. Jones The AEI Press Publisher for the American Enterprise Institute W A S H I N G T O N , D . C . 2000 Book Title 2 Chapter Title Contents Foreword vv Norman J. Ornstein and Thomas E. Mann Part 1 The Editor’s Introduction The Truman Aide Turned Professor 33 Part 2 Neustadt Memos for the Kennedy Transition Memo 1. Organizing the Transition 21 Memo 2. Staffing the President-Elect 38 Attachment A: Roosevelt’s Approach to Staffing the White House 54 Attachment B: Roosevelt’s Approach to Staffing the Budget Bureau 61 Memo 3. Cabinet Departments: Some Things to Keep in Mind 63 Memo 4. White House Titles 70 Memo 5. A White House Aide for Personnel and Congressional Liaison 72 Memo 6. The National Security Council: First Steps 75 Memo 7. Shutting Down Eisenhower’s “Cabinet System” 82 Memo 8. Appointing Fred Dutton “Staff Secretary” Instead of “Cabinet Secretary” 83 Memo 9. Location of Disarmament Agency 86 Memo 10. The Science Adviser: First Steps 94 iii iv CONTENTS Memo 11. Coping with “Flaps” in the Early Days of the New Administration 997 Memo 12. Possible Remarks by the President at the Outset of the Cabinet Meeting (prepared with Fred Dutton) 101 Part 3 Neustadt Memos from Reagan to Clinton Memo 13. Historical Problems in Staffing the White House (for James Baker III) 107 Memo 14. Transition Planning during the Campaign (for Michael Dukakis law partner Paul Brountas) 120 Memo 15. “Lessons” for the Eleven Weeks (for Bill Clinton friend Robert B.
  • Displacements and Hmong Transnational Politics, 1975-2010

    Displacements and Hmong Transnational Politics, 1975-2010

    Dreaming of Home, Dreaming of Land: Displacements and Hmong Transnational Politics, 1975-2010 A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Her Vang IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Dr. Erika Lee, Advisor July 2010 © Her Vang 2010 All rights reserved ACKNOWLEDGMENTS In 1933, the Lakota author Luther Standing Bear suggested that written history was second best to oral tradition because “a people enrich their minds who keep their history on the leaves of memory.”1 For much of their history, the Hmong also stored their past not in books but on “the leaves of their memory,” and they passed down their history orally from one generation to the next. Parents in Euro-America read to their children to put them to sleep, but Hmong children traditionally fell asleep listening to their parents tell Hmong folklores and their own family history. Storytelling and history- telling were important parts of traditional Hmong culture and livelihood. A Hmong child who learned the most Hmong folklores and knew the most about the family’s history often grew up to become the leader of the family and the clan. Today, the keeper of the family’s past is still the leader of the family and the clan. A Hmong leader knows all the secrets of his family and clan, and he is responsible for resolving all disputes involving his family and clan. Despite this significance, history, I admit, has not always been my chosen field of academic inquiry. First, I previously had no strong motivation to do written history because written history, for the Hmong, was secondary to their oral tradition.
  • Conservative Think Tanks and Higher Education Policy: Selected Public Policy Research Institutes and Their Views on Issues in Higher Education

    Conservative Think Tanks and Higher Education Policy: Selected Public Policy Research Institutes and Their Views on Issues in Higher Education

    1 CONSERVATIVE THINK TANKS AND HIGHER EDUCATION POLICY: SELECTED PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTES AND THEIR VIEWS ON ISSUES IN HIGHER EDUCATION Susan Marie Willis A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY December 1991 Approved by Doctoral Committee: ____________________Advisor Department of Educational Foundations and Inquiry ___________________ Graduate College Representative ____________________ _________________ _ i Acknowledgements I would like to express my sincerest thanks to those persons who contributed to the successful completion of this dissertation. I shall always be grateful to Dr. William York, Professor Emeritus, who helped me formulate the study initially and who encouraged me to pursue this methodology. Special thanks are owing also to Dr. Malcolm Campbell, who as my advisor took me down the home stretch and never stinted with his wise and patient advice, nor failed in his professional commitment. To the other members of my committee, Drs. Leigh Chiarelott, Thomas Wymer, and Carney Strange, I extend my appreciation -- "they also serve who only stand and wait." There are many other individuals I knew at Bowling Green State University who gave of themselves personally and intellectually over the years, especially my colleagues in graduate school, those named and unnamed. For all the support, the brainstorming, and the friendship, for all the good times, I wish to thank Dr. Karen Wheeler, Louise Paradis, Susan Pastor, and Patrick Kennedy. ii ABSTRACT The purpose of this study was two-fold: (1) to describe four conservative public policy research institutions as organizations in comparison with more traditional policy organizations such as the Brookings Institution, and (2) to examine their views on current issues in higher education in relation to selected national higher education reports.
  • Jeane Kirkpatrick and the End of the Cold War: Dictatorships, Democracy, and Human Rights Ilan Wurman Claremont Mckenna College

    Jeane Kirkpatrick and the End of the Cold War: Dictatorships, Democracy, and Human Rights Ilan Wurman Claremont Mckenna College

    Claremont Colleges Scholarship @ Claremont CMC Senior Theses CMC Student Scholarship 2009 Jeane Kirkpatrick and the End of the Cold War: Dictatorships, Democracy, and Human Rights Ilan Wurman Claremont McKenna College Recommended Citation Wurman, Ilan, "Jeane Kirkpatrick and the End of the Cold War: Dictatorships, Democracy, and Human Rights" (2009). CMC Senior Theses. Paper 226. http://scholarship.claremont.edu/cmc_theses/226 This Open Access Senior Thesis is brought to you by Scholarship@Claremont. It has been accepted for inclusion in this collection by an authorized administrator. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CLAREMONT McKENNA COLLEGE JEANE KIRKPATRICK AND THE END OF THE COLD WAR: DICTATORSHIPS, DEMOCRACY, AND HUMAN RIGHTS SUBMITTED TO PROFESSOR JOHN J. PITNEY JR. AND DEAN GREGORY HESS BY ILAN WURMAN FOR SENIOR THESIS FALL 2008 - SPRING 2009 APRIL 27, 2009 ii ii iii Table of Contents Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………...……iv Introduction………………………………………………………………………….……......1 Part I: An Intellectual and Political History Chapter One: Cold War Consensus Shattered………..……………………………………....8 Chapter Two: Dictatorships and Double Standards………………………………………....33 Chapter Three: The Carter Years: Was Kirkpatrick Right?....................................................45 Part II: Kirkpatrick and the Reagan Administration Chapter Four: The Kirkpatrick and Reagan Doctrines..…………………….……………….69 Chapter Five: Putting Policy to Practice: Chile and El Salvador………...………………….89 Bibliography………………………………………………………………..…………...….118 Appendices…………………………………………………………………………………122 iii iv Acknowledgments I could not have written this thesis without the help of many people, and first and foremost without the help of my adviser and professor, John J. Pitney Jr. He guided me to a doable and exciting topic from my initial mumblings about Reagan and democratization. Without his help, this year-long endeavor would never have come to fruition.
  • Party Polarization from Reagan to the Present

    Party Polarization from Reagan to the Present

    PARTY POLARIZATION FROM REAGAN TO THE PRESENT B. Dan Wood [email protected] Department of Political Science Texas A&M University 4348 TAMU College Station, TX 77843-4348 Phone: (979) 845-1610 FAX: (979) 847-8924 PAPER PRESENTED AT THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE WESTERN POLITICAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION, CAESAR’S PALACE, LAS VEGAS, NV APRIL 1-4, 2015 PARTY POLARIZATION FROM REAGAN THROUGH PRESENT On May 17, 2012, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney spoke at a $50,000-a-plate dinner at the home of private equity magnate Marc Leder in Boca Raton, Florida. He told the wealthy donors “There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to take care of them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it. That that’s an entitlement, and the government should give it to them. … These are people who pay no income tax. Forty- seven percent of Americans pay no income tax. … And so my job is not to worry about those people – I'll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.” (MoJo News Team 2012) Romney did not intend his remarks to be heard outside of his wealthy audience. However, a bartender surreptitiously recorded his remarks. Four months later, he released the recording to the press. With media coverage escalating, Romney’s remarks became well known to most Americans, and were probably the basis for his 2012 election defeat.
  • Buying a Movement: Right-Wing Foundations and American Politics

    Buying a Movement: Right-Wing Foundations and American Politics

    BUYING A MOVEMENT Right-Wing Foundations and American Politics Executive Summary Each year, conservative foundations pour millions of dollars into a broad range of conservative political organizations. These foundation gifts are remarkable for two principal reasons: first, their sheer size and concentration; second, the willingness of the foundations to promote a highly politicized agenda by funding a broad range of organizations. The following report examines the funding patterns of a number of significant conservative foundations and their grantees. The report demonstrates: • Right-wing foundations have developed a truly comprehensive funding strategy, providing grants to a broad range of groups, each promoting right-wing positions to their specific audiences. The grants have created and nurtured an enormous range of organizations all bent on promoting a far-right-wing agenda. Recipients of foundation largesse include the right-wing media; national “think tanks” and advocacy groups; a budding network of regional and state-based think tanks; conservative university programs; conservative college newspapers; conservative scholars and more. In many of these funding areas, progressive and mainstream foundation giving lags far behind. • Five foundations stand out from the rest: the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, the Koch Family foundations, the John M. Olin Foundation, the Scaife Family foundations and the Adolph Coors Foundation. Each has helped fund a range of far- right programs, including some of the most politically charged work of the last several years. For example, the American Spectator magazine, which led the charge on President Bill Clinton’s state trooper contretemps and launched a slash-and-burn strategy targeting Anita Hill, is a prime recipient of foundation support.
  • Taking Care”—The Unitary Executive and the Presidential Signing Statement

    Taking Care”—The Unitary Executive and the Presidential Signing Statement

    Faithfully Executing” and “Taking Care”—The Unitary Executive and the Presidential Signing Statement. Christopher S. Kelley Department of Political Science, Miami University (OH) Please direct inquiries to [email protected] Prepared for delivery at the 2002 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, August 29-September 1, 2002. Copyright by the American Political Science Association Abstract: The presidential signing statement is one of the more misunderstood and understudied tools that presidents use. In this paper, I will discuss what the signing statement is and through the theory of the Unitary Executive, I will show how they have become important. I will provide a complete picture of how the signing statement has manifest itself over time and how it has become an important political weapon of the executive branch. My approach to the study of presidential power is firmly grounded in the constitution, with the Unitary Executive and the use of the signing statement flowing from the “Oath” clause and the “Take Care” clause of the constitution. When Governor George W. Bush was campaigning for the presidency, he appeared on the ABC Sunday morning talk show, “This Week with Sam Donaldson and Cokie Roberts.” This was in early January 2000, and he was being asked a number of questions about how a President George W. Bush would govern. One question, from George Will, was aimed at campaign finance reform. After asking Governor Bush whether he thought the president had a constitutional duty to independently interpret the Constitution, which Governor Bush agreed he could, Will asked him if he would veto McCain-Feingold or Shays-Meehan, the two campaign finance reform bills in Congress because they unconstitutionally infringed upon free speech.