There’s a well-known story about a 1970s Tory party meeting where new leader Margaret Thatcher waved high a copy of Friedrich Hayek’s The Constitution of Liberty before slamming it down on a table and proclaiming, “This is what we believe!” Hopefully, the stirring moment is included in the new biopic starring Meryl Streep.
Jon Huntsman in the 1980s, along with President Ronald Reagan and Rep. Jack Kemp
Anyway, lots of Republicans right now would love a 2012 presidential nominee like Thatcher, one so obviously smart and passionate about the virtue and necessity of economic freedom. They don’t want only to beat Barack Obama, but also rhetorically beat and bury Obamanomics, the latest incarnation of the same wealth-distribution ideology that had infected Thatcher’s Britain back then, almost fatally.
The diplomat. Jon Huntsman clearly isn’t a candidate super comfortable with escalating the 2012 elections into a climactic clash of ideologies. He’s too cool, too diplomatic. Would rather move beyond Obama’s obvious policy failures and talk about where the nation needs to go. Focus on solutions. And Huntsman may well have never read Hayek … or Joseph Schumpeter or Thomas Sowell. If he has, he sure doesn’t talk about them.
But know that Thatcher’s famous Braveheart moment, as deliciously cinematic as it is, most likely is apocryphal. Sure, Thatcher read Hayek’s Road to Serfdom at Oxford. But Thatcherism was really birthed in Alfred Roberts’s little grocery in Grantham as the future prime minister helped her father around the shop and experienced quotidian capitalism up close and personal. A former political ally once said Thatcher had an “intuition” for free enterprise, a gut instinct that was reinforced only later by intellectual argument.
Huntsman has also seen entrepreneurial capitalism operate firsthand, though on a grander scale. Growing up a 99 percenter, he watched his middle-class dad build a company and eventually become a billionaire. He later worked in the family business himself before becoming Utah’s governor and then U.S. ambassador to China.
Tax cutter. Those lifetime lessons have made a big impact. Huntsman, like Thatcher, seems to be a conservative of intuition derived from personal experience. Huntsman a conservative? As governor, he massively cut income and sales taxes—instituting a 5 percent flat income tax—while expanding the state’s “rainy day” reserve fund. His approach to healthcare reform relied on markets rather than mandates. As the Club for Growth describes it, “Utah’s main health reform contained no individual mandate, no employer mandate, and has very limited regulatory authority. … It empowers individuals to take ownership of their own health insurance and to choose coverage that works for them.”
If elected president, Huntsman says he would like to slash tax rates to their lowest levels since before America entered World War I and eliminate taxes on capital gains and dividends. Powerful supply-side medicine for an anemic economic recovery. Huntsman has embraced Representative Paul Ryan’s transformational, market-oriented debt-reduction plan, calling it “the model I would work from.” He’s also pro-life, a dedicated free trader and—at least as evidenced by his sweeping bank reform plan—an ardent anti-crony capitalist.
Of course, conservatives would sure like more details about Huntsman’s views on dealing with climate change. And just how would he match defense cuts that might reduce spending to Clinton-era levels with superpower America’s global commitments and power-projection capabilities? A lot more clarity is needed there. And the Club charges Huntsman with being disinterested in cutting spending when governor.
Heavy fire. But a good amount of the flack Huntsman has taken from the Right seems more about form than function. Accepting Obama’s offer to go to Beijing. Giving a conciliatory rather than confrontational candidacy announcement speech. Mucking up the debates with too much snark and not enough talk of conservative tax and entitlement reform. Jon Huntsman (R-Davos), the darling of Manhattan magazine writers. The Republican uncomfortable with being a Republican. Yet the policies Huntsman advocates, if implemented, would usher in a conservative, free-market, small-government revolution that no Tea Party member could help but applaud. No Thatcherite or Reaganite, either.
This isn’t a lesson in comparative conservatism, an attempt to prove Huntsman is more or less conservative than Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, or the rest of the Republican field—or more or less deserving of the GOP nomination. Certainly not. This is about policy, about agenda, and about not ignoring some great ideas because of a candidate’s awkward introduction.
William F. Buckley, Jr., the intellectual father of the modern Right advised voting for the most conservative candidate who can win. After Mitt Romney’s disastrous interview with Fox’s Brett Baier (after having run for president for the past half-decade and avoiding interviews like the plague this cycle), it is clear that Jon Huntsman is the candidate who matches that description. Jon Huntsman was overwhelmingly elected twice as governor of one of the three most conservative states in the union — y’know, the one that ousted a longtime GOP senator for a Tea Party candidate. Does anyone seriously believe that Huntsman would have snared 78% of Utah’s vote if he were a RINO? If you’re interested in defeating Barack Obama, it’s time to get real.
Cutting taxes is not small government; cutting spending is small government. Starve the beast was an interesting idea; it has been tried, and it failed. Massively.
Huntsman is the only Republican candidate that can beat Obama. It is a shame that he has not be taken seriously by the GOP.
You make a great point – Gene. Huntsman is qualified to be president . . . win, lose, or draw! I am an independent who will not think twice about voting for and campaigning for Obama UNLESS Huntsman wins the nomination. Only then will I give pause and weigh their platforms and records before voting. But I cannot stomach the thought of one of the other Republican candidates winning the nomination . . . BARF. Paul is palatable but will not get the votes or support needed to win. Does Newt REALLY think we are going to make his jumpoff the First Lady?! Not!
I’m with you on that one sullivonne. If its not Huntsman, Obama will win, and I will vigorously campaign for his reelection. Huntsman is a great candidate, he would make me consider both sides. Huntsman is the only candidate who has any idea what he is doing on foreign policy, and would be great for the economy of this nation. He’s lived overseas 4 times and intimately knows the intricacies of China, which will hugely help us in the 21st century. Then again, a Perry campaign would be hilarious!
Stoic Patriot would have had a hard time existing under the leadership of almost any democratic leader in the 19th or 20th century, none of whom imposed much or their religion on the populace, and many of whom were morally “impaired” in one way or another (usually with mistresses).
The function of a leader is to administer the laws made by the legislature. The function of the legislature is to make laws respecting how to spend the public’s money (mostly) and how to prevent individuals from harming others. If he wants a morally superior person, he should suggest that fellow for church leadership, not government. They are two separate spheres and MUST be so, because we all don’t agree on religion but we must live together peaceably.
You’re right, problem is more with style than actual policies. But I want a candidate to take it to the opposition. Playing nice is playing patsie and will get us no where. The guy seems like a wimp and uncomfortable with conservatives.
HERE HERE!!!!
Jon Huntsman introduced himself as a candidate by saying he would not attack Obama no matter how much money he takes from the greediest Wall Street fat cats that he plans to use to run ads falsely portraying Republicans as puppets of Wall Street.
We need a candidate willing to boldly point out that George Soros’ net worth has doubled as a result of Obama’s policies. We need a candidate willing to point out that the middle class is being trapped into government dependence based on Obama’s policies!
Huntsman’s record is fantastic. But if he is unwilling to use any and every moment on the national stage to attack the outright destruction of USA by Obama’s policies, he is absolutely worthless if not worse than worthless.
Hyperbole here!
I for one am glad a candidate is brave enough to eschew mud slinging. Attacking a person says nothing about the attacker other than they are willing to attack. I am always much more interested in a persons policy’s than I am with how impressively they can denounce the incumbent of the job they want to have. Furthermore, if Obama really wanted the outright destruction of the USA then he could have done a lot better at it. That’s not to say he’s some super cool guy or anything, but claiming he is outright destroying the nation is completely false. No one person could do that, and they would do a hell of a lot better job of it than either Obama or Bush, or any one of the dozens of presidents who have been accused of the same thing.
This, I think, is the mentality that Huntsman is trying to avoid. Politicians so often choose their campaign style and time in office according to what would play well on reality TV: Bickering, name calling, only doing something that’s actually constructive when it suits their desires or is absolutely necessary (and sometimes not even then, if the payoff is good enough). And we let them. The fact that Huntsman is promoting what he will do in office rather than blatantly attacking his opponents scores big points with me. While I don’t agree with all of his ideas, I sure do like him a lot more than all the other train wrecks running for the GOP nomination.
John Huntsman appears to be a clear-eyed, no b.s., pragmatist, unafraid to raise and address issues critical to this country’s citizens. I find it funny that comments in The Enterprise Blog see him as wimpy; he’s the only (R) that has really had the guts to touch these issues with other than an elitist’s arrogance and a contempt for Crony Capitalism. In each of the areas he addresses – Financial Reform, Foreign Policy, Energy Security, Jobs, National Security – he articulates an approach that a pragmatic independent like me finds a lot to agree with. I don’t expect he’ll get the nomination, but as one of the 99%, he has my attention.
I became a fan of Jon Huntsman after seeing his interview at the Brookings Institute on CSPAN a few weeks ago. He is articulate and informed enough to debate Obama, and I find his stance politically to be not so extremely right-wing as to make people uncomfortable. His understanding of foreign policy is expansive. As a former governor he has executive experience. As ambassador to China, a skill in diplomacy and level-headedness. Romney is showing some signs of weakness at the moment, and I think they are both men of true moral conviction and similar values that I share. I hope to see an appreciation for Jon in New Hampshire. He is far and away more qualified and electable than Bachman, Perry, or Cain (a sideshow somewhat, but perhaps a potential GOP VP runningmate). Good luck Jon Huntsman – I’ve just signed up to volunteer in Orange County, CA and made a small donation tonight.
I believe that there is a position that can strongly influence voters- a position in the primaries and
carried out in the primaries as part of the candidate’s position. Voter solicitation will be made in the
internet to mail in a form ( provided on the internet) to implement immediate adoption of a 10 year term limit on any member of Congress. After that he (she) is out and may no longer serve in Congress.
The original concept of serving in Congress was a thank-you for providing a chance to be successful. Having donated his time to Government he then returned to private life. In short government is not an occupation but a thank-you.
Today is a far cry from those people of principal. Washington is where we do the people’s business-
Yeah-Right.
Correction: Principle is the correct spelling
I think Jon Huntsman has the best chance to go against Obama. He would be more attractive to Independents and Democrats not happy with Obama. To bad the GOP are stuck with these other candidates who are not appealing to me as an Independent. Jon if you are not picked Run as an Independent Republican (I know you won’t do this but I can dream).