| An Open Letter From David Horowitz
David Horowitz
June 20, 2002
Today, our party is facing a crucial gubernatorial battle against an
unscrupulous, well-funded but politically vulnerable incumbent. The outcome
of this contest will have crucial implications for the presidential elections
of 2004.
At the same time, we are entering the campaign from a position of weakness.
Our party holds no major statewide office and its traditional electoral
base is eroding. To meet these challenges, requires bold and innovative
leadership so that we can capture voters who are not registered Republicans.
It requires a unified party so that we can retain voters who are.
Yet even as this electoral contest enters its serious phase, our party
chairman Shawn Steel is engaged in a bitter and divisive intra-party battle
with Bush-adviser Gerry Parsky over the creation of a special commission
that invites the input of the two Democratic Senators, Feinstein and Boxer,
in recommending candidates to the President for nomination to federal district
courts in California.
Some party activists, including Steel, have attempted to portray this
as a philosophical battle between the party's conservative and liberal
wings, and to cast Gerry Parsky as the leader of the moderate faction.
The same activists claim that the bi-partisan judicial commission is designed
to advance the liberal cause.
I disagree.
I have taken many hits for my conservative beliefs, and I was a strong
supporter of Shawn Steel's bid to become party chair. Before his election,
Shawn was a director of my Center for the Study of Popular Culture and
a member of its executive committee. When Shawn ran for the vice chairmanship
of the California Republican Party against Brooks Firestone as the candidate
of the liberals, I was one of two people he chose to nominate him at the
State Party Convention in Sacramento. I gave Shawn my wholehearted support
the following year when he ran a second time against Brooks Firestone,
this time for the party chair. But for reasons I am about to make clear,
I am utterly opposed to the campaign he has now launched against the judicial
commission and Gerry Parsky. It is a divisive and counter-productive campaign,
and if continued may jeopardize the prospect of a Bill Simon victory in
the fall.
In the current political climate, California Republicans need to keep
three things in mind when considering any political issue, not just judicial
appointments:
-
We are a minority party in our state (out-registered by more than a million
votes);
-
Our country is at war;
-
In this war, our country is being led by a conservative Republican, who
is the most popular President on record, and who is changing the political
landscape. Everything Republicans in this state can hope for ride on the
success of the Bush Administration.
With these points in mind, the following facts and considerations are crucial:
-
This is the sensible course. The U.S. Constitution provides for judicial
selection by the President with the "advice and consent of the Senate."
As a practical matter, this means that every Senator has a veto on judicial
appointments. Moreover, during such times as the present - when the
political party to which the President belongs does not control the Senate
- the danger is all too real that the White House would appoint individuals
who never secure Senate confirmation. (As an all too painful reminder
of the point, remember that Senator Joseph Biden's Judiciary Committee
left some 100 judicial nominees unconfirmed as former President Bush completed
his term in office.)
With the present commission, however, the White House has put in place
a system in California that has sidestepped contentious judicial confirmation
battles and secured swift confirmation by the Senate. The proof is
in the final product. Because of the Commission's work, we now have
sitting in Los Angeles two judges who had been unable to secure Senate
confirmation under former President Bush's administration. Had the
conservative bona fides of these candidates - or any of the others emerging
from the Commission - been in question, the White House could have simply
exercised its prerogative not to appoint any of them to the bench.
-
There is no satisfactory alternative. Over the last eight years, California
Republicans have lost the political battles that would allow us to call
the shots on these judicial appointments. We lost the governorship. We
lost the Senate seats. We lost the Assembly. We lost the credibility of
being a serious challenger at the statewide level. Worst of all, we lost
the presidential contest of 2000 by more than a million votes. We cannot
afford to let this happen again. Permanent war on every front will weaken,
not strengthen us. Compromise is a way of biding time to regroup, and to
enable us to launch a new campaign in which can change political losses
into political wins. If Bill Simon is elected the next governor of California,
the political situation will be changed. If George Bush is our President
for eight years, the entire spectrum of Republican politics, but particularly
conservatism will be immeasurably enhanced.
-
Gerry Parsky's agenda is simple: to insure a George Bush win in 2004. Gerry
Parsky is a George W. Bush partisan. There is not a shred of doubt in my
mind that Gerry Parsky is wholly devoted to serving this President, and
that should be our priority as well.
Conservatives in California must grasp an absolutely critical political
truth: Our own agendas depend on the success of the President, and a repeat
victory in 2004. Should George Bush win California in 2004, our party will
prosper. If George Bush is President a second time, the opportunities for
conservatives will be geometrically increased. If he loses, the setback
for conservative agendas will be enormous. To sum up: Everything conservatives
can hope for politically depends on the ability of this President to broaden
his party's electoral base and create a national Republican majority.
The next few years will be crucial for the Republican party, for our
nation and for the conservative cause. In order to win the battles, we
need to go forward together, following the President's lead. |
DAVID HOROWITZ is a nationally known author and lifelong
civil rights activist.
He is an outspoken opponent of censorship and racial
preferences, and a defender of the rights of minorities and other groups
under attack.
Horowitz is the author of numerous books including
anautobiography, Radical Son, which has been described as “the first
great autobiography of his generation,” and which chronicles his odyssey
from radical activism to the current positions he holds.
|
