Better in their words…

Some good responses – especially the first one…

============

Peter Berkowitz cautions conservatives not to demand uncompromising purity from their politicians (“The Myth of Conservative Purity,” op-ed, Sept. 7). Mr. Berkowitz argues that achievement of basic conservative goals requires clarity of principles, but also pragmatism that gives “due weight to settled expectations and longstanding practices” (e.g., public education and state assistance to orphans).

Mr. Berkowitz need not worry about Republican pragmatism. First, the overwhelming majority of conservatives, even tea partiers, accept that a return to the minimalist government of the late 1700s is not in the cards; few are screaming for closing public schools and turning orphans out on the street. Second, Republican politicians, who have not controlled both houses of Congress with a veto-proof Senate majority for 100 years, certainly have mastered the art of compromise.

With regard to fiscal-policy compromise, growth in federal spending has outstripped growth in U.S. GDP by more than 2% per year for 80 years. Even the Reagan years represented little more than a spending-growth speed bump. With regard to divisive social issues, Mr. Berkowitz notes that President Reagan offered strong words but restrained action on abortion and school prayer. Thirty years later, we have lots of the former and none of the latter. It may be politically expedient to dodge divisive cultural issues, but what does that portend for out-of-wedlock births, traditional marriage and basic standards of public behavior and decency in another 30 years?

From the start of the Great Depression, GOP compromisers occasionally slowed the pace of federal growth, but never stopped the long-term trend; that’s why federal spending today represents 25% of GDP versus a little more than 4% in 1931. Meanwhile, Democratic “compromisers” in the past three years managed to accelerate federal spending, pass an $800 billion stimulus package and engineer partial government takeovers of the health-care (ObamaCare) and financial-services (Dodd-Frank) sectors. The GOP’s trimming around the edges has disappointed for 80 years. It is time for conservatives to demand something bolder.

Rick Franklin – Charlottesville, Va.

Conservatives do not seem to think of themselves as purists, but as people of common sense who argue for what is prudent, what has worked best in the past, and above all, what is true about us and our present condition. Those who disagree with them often accuse them of not wanting peace, to share communal responsibilities or to help the poor. These accusations are neither helpful nor true. What is needed is not to compromise, but to find, with humility, some ways to truly agree on how to achieve mutual goals.

Elizabeth Bickford  -Cazenovia, N.Y.

Mr. Berkowitz correctly points to the wisdom of compromise, a Greek virtue of pursuing the middle path. The problem, however, is that Congressional compromises over many years have left us with $70 trillion of debt and unfunded commitments, including unfunded Social Security and Medicare liabilities, for which our descendents must now pay.

Hal W. Reynolds – Los Angeles

When Mr. Berkowitz writes that “conservatism encourages a vigilant search for opportunities to promote liberty while counseling that our knowledge is limited, our resources scarce and our attention poor,” he seems to be confusing prudence with compromise. Prudence in pursuing conservative goals is not the same as compromising them away. And while some circumstances may warrant compromise, it is also true that some require a determined adherence to principle.

Compromise gave us the Munich Pact. Adherence to principle gave us V-E Day.

Gene Tarne – Manassas, Va.

via Compromise Hasn’t Served Conservatives Very Well — Letters to the Editor – WSJ.com.