In the aftermath of the 1992 Presidential election, analysts as well as many Republican leaders placed a good deal of the blame on the issue of family values. A term nearly unheard of until the campaign, family values soon became the topic of conversations everywhere from the kitchen table to the Oval Office. When George Bush and Dan Quayle emphasized the issue as a central pillar of their platform, the moderate Republicans and independents were frightened by the idea of bringing moral issues into a campaign. Meanwhile, Pat Buchanan sat at home, quite pleased with his work. It seems that no one has learned his lesson. But believe it or not, that might be for the best.
As the 1996 campaign makes its way down the backstretch, and the Republican candidates continue to align themselves for the final push into primary season, two basic similarities can be drawn to the 1992 election.
First, there is the Buchanan factor. The man partially responsible for the Republican party's unwavering stand on abortion in 1992 is making a solid showing in the polls once again. Four years ago at this time, he was busy scaring Bush, and this time he appears in most polls to be running neck-in-neck with a few other candidates for first place in the consolation race behind Bob Dole. Not that Dole's numbers are not wavering, but that is how the race appears to be developing. The result of Buchanan's boisterousness could very well be another push toward the right, come the time of the Republican convention.
Second, there is the third party factor. With another push toward the far right for the Republicans, the door will be left wide open for another moderate candidate to enter. Not to assume that Colin Powell will enter the race, but the probability for his running seems greater than that against his running. So if Powell shies away from taking a party stance -- as he has thus far -- he sets himself up as the ideal third party candidate.
Though the Ross Perot of 1992 and Powell are vastly different as people, as third-party candidates they are similarly intriguing. Neither took a firm stand on the so-called moral issues, and neither declared any type of party bias, in the past or the present. Both attempt to remove themselves from the realm of "politics as usual," and both also put economic matters near the center of their campaigns. However, working in Powell's favor in 1996 is his experience in foreign affairs, which was the chief strike against Perot in 1992.
Yet even with these similarities, there is the legacy of the 1994 Congressional elections which will not soon be forgotten. This, in my opinion, will be the great deciding factor in 1996. The 104th Congress has taken the negative connotation out of the Republican party, as well as the issue of family values. No longer is the subject the taboo that it once was; in fact, it is once again figuring to come to the forefront of the Republican platform, as it very well should.
The issues involved under the heading of family values are any which directly relate to the welfare of the American family. Some people scoff at the idea of there even being an American family, yet even if such a claim is true, it does not mean that we are to accept that as an ideal. What would be more un-American than to fold under the great pressure of losing the family?
It amazes me that some people deny the importance of what was, and is, the most central thread to our existence. Without any moral structure to the family, how are we to raise our children and properly answer the questions that are facing them in the upcoming century? There is a definite need for moral guidelines, and having that basis centered in the family has worked for centuries. Who are we to question that now?
Most of the current candidates for the Republican nomination realize that a great many Americans share this very sentiment. The candidates who addressed these issues for the most part ended up a part of the 104th Congress, and those who did not are sitting at home in their respective districts, bemoaning what could have been. And now, it appears as though the candidate who emerges from the pile-up of the Republican primary will be one who knows the importance of family values. We can only hope that such a candidate would then move on towards the White House.
The views of the right are no longer isolating -- they involve each of us. We all have a strong interest in the direction of the country, and it is up to us to reclaim it for ourselves. Over two centuries of inertia are leading us forward in the same manner we began, yet we continue to cry moral decay as an excuse to abandon traditional values. It is now time that we look at where we are coming from in order to decide where it is that we are going.
