RightChange: Should Conservatives Think Twice About Newt?

Republican Presidential Candidates Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney are taking turns at the number one spot in the polls, but when it comes to endorsements, Romney has come out stronger.  Newt has risen to the top of the field by poising himself as the “solid conservative alternative to Mitt Romney” hoping the electorate will see him as such.   A recent article from the Washington Examiner shows his record may prove otherwise and that voters should cautious in casting their support.

The Newtmentum began after he got a key endorsement from New Hampshire’s largest newspaper, the Union Leader of Manchester.  He immediately jumped to the top of Reuters and Gallup polls, making it appear that voters were split between him and Romney, but Romney is getting a plethora of high-profile endorsements.

The most recent from South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley and the Des Moines Register newspaper including a bid from New Jersey Governor Chris Christie. The Huffington Post did an analysis that shows Romney has nearly tripled his endorsements from the Republican Party establishment over the last three months: 59 endorsements from GOP governors, U.S. House and Senate members, and state party chairs.  See their chart below:

Newt may be winning in the public opinion polls, but he only has endorsements from seven members of Congress and one from Georgia Governor Nathan Deal.  Newt is sinking compared to Romney, but these endorsements have not raised public opinion for Romney.  If voters go Newt for the GOP nomination, they may soon realize they didn’t get the anti-establishment candidate they hoped for.  At least that is what a recent Washington Examiner editorial argues. Starting with ever so unpopular individual healthcare mandate:

“But there are substantial reasons why thoughtful conservatives should think very carefully before jumping on this bandwagon.

There are, for example, gaping holes in Gingrich's conservative credentials. As the American Spectator's David Catron pointed out Monday, Gingrich has long been a fan of Dr. Donald Berwick. Berwick just resigned as President Obama's director of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which oversees Obamacare. Obama put Berwick there because of his professed love for Britain's socialized medicine.

Berwick's views are so radical that not even a Democratic Senate would confirm him, yet Gingrich wrote this in a Washington Post op-ed published in 2000: "Don Berwick at the Institute for Healthcare Improvement has worked for years to spread the word that the same systematic approach to quality control that has worked so well in manufacturing could create a dramatically safer, less expensive and more effective system of health and health care."

Gingrich's wonkish delight in industrially rationed health care may come as a shock to some on the Right, but it is entirely consistent with his long-standing enthusiasm for individual mandates in health care. In his 2005 book, "Winning the Future," Gingrich put it this way: "We need some significant changes to ensure that every American is insured, but we should make it clear that a 21st Century Intelligent System requires everyone to participate in the insurance system."

The article also argues that there are “gaping holes” in Newt’s claim to be anti-establishment:

“Gingrich's most frequently repeated claim to the mantle of conservative leadership, of course, is the Contract with America and the Republican revolution of 1994. But Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., made a strong case in his 2003 book, "Breach of Trust," that Gingrich's affinity for the trappings of power led him to undermine the momentum for fundamental change. As Coburn described it, the fervor of the freshmen lawmakers of 1994 quickly put them at odds with the first Republican House Speaker in four decades: "Gingrich would receive our input, but he rarely took it seriously ... We were from the outside and wet behind the ears in terms of politics and we obviously didn't know as much about history as he did. It would not take long for us to become 'the conservatives' to him."

The Examiner also points out the $1.6 million Gingrich received from Fannie and Freddie to lobby on their behalf along with his work with ultra Liberal Nancy Pelosi on cap and trade.

Republican voters are split on who should get the nomination, perhaps it is worth reading opposing arguments on either candidate with an open mind as we sail through the primaries.

Back To Blog