Another example of the Danforth all-knowing attitude came after the
conclusion of a major study by the Department of Health, Education and
Welfare (HEW). The biggest issue in the 1970s and early 1980s was
whether welfare should be extended to two-parent families. Then it was a
state option. The liberals said that denying welfare forced fathers out
of the home and thus weakened the family. Conservatives held that
welfare eroded economic bonds and increased family break-up. So HEW
launched the Seattle/Denver Income Maintenance Experiment "Sime-Dime."
This study was designed to show how welfare would help two-parent
families. The results were to be presented to the Senate Finance
Committee, upon which Danforth served. An HEW (now Health and Human
Services) careerist, not a Reagan appointee by any means, told the
stunned Finance Committee that two-parent welfare seemed to increase
family break-up, especially among Hispanics. An angry Danforth yelled at
this poor career guy who was just reporting on the findings of the
study, "If that's what your study shows, then it's wrong."
As Danforth seeks again to be a leader of his party, it is useful to
remind folks that the last time he did so he ran against Senator John G.
Tower (R-TX) to be Chairman of the Senate GOP Policy Committee. He got
six votes out of the 43 GOP Senators then voting. If they had put
Danforth in a leadership position they would have had to endure
endless pontification.
What Danforth argues now in his new book, and has argued for some years,
is that the addition of evangelicals, fundamentalists and conservative
Catholics to the Republican Party has forced the Party to deal with
issues such as marriage and abortion and stem-cell research and this,
according to a still angry Danforth, is wrong.
Is it really? When the religious right joined with the Republican Party
in the late 1970s the first fruits of that marriage came in the form of
unexpected victories of Roger Jepsen as Senator from Iowa and Gordon H.
Humphrey from New Hampshire.
Next election was 1980. Ronald Reagan won a landslide election. With him
came a raft of new conservative Senators, giving the GOP control of the
Senate for the first time since 1954. The Senate shifted back and forth
until 1994, when the Republican landslide was so deep that the GOP
picked up 52 House seats and controlled that body for the first time in
40 years. The Senate also came along in that landslide year and mostly
has been in Republican hands since.
What Danforth argues for is the Republican Party of the mid-1970s.
Republicans were a minority but, hey, who cares when you are having fun.
When the Congress did consider a rare moral issue his colleagues did
consult St. Jack. After all, he is an Episcopal priest.
When the religious right came to power it had its own clergy to consult.
Poor St. Jack was left out in the cold. If he gets his way and the
religious right is no longer a part of the Republican Party the GOP will
revert back to a permanent minority. The Republicans needed General
Dwight D. Eisenhower to win in 1952 and even Ike couldn't save them in
1954. After that it was 26 years before the GOP was in a majority in the
Senate and 40 years to take over the House. Does this party really want
to listen to Danforth and other forces who want a Republican Party sans
the great unwashed. The elites always looked down on the rest of us. St.
Jack is part of the elite. He always has been and always will be. The
defective elites brought us where we are today. Our problem isn't too
many religious conservatives. Our problem is that there are still too
few of us to make a difference.
The country clubbers will love St. Jack's book. While they are out on
the links discussing it, it is our people who will be manning the
precincts. I know. I just spoke to a large group from all around
Pennsylvania. St. Jack couldn't gather a group like that if his life
depended on it.
It is said that the Republicans are the stupid party. If they follow the
advice of St. Jack they will prove that moniker to be true.