Still More Business and Politics

by DemFromCT

A recurring theme: business does not cotton to social conservatives and their agenda; it's bad for business. Now the WaPo has come out and said so:

Business Groups Tire of GOP Focus On Social Issues

"I'm inclined to support the Republican Party, but the question becomes, how much other stuff do I have to put up with to maintain that identification?" asked Andrew A. Samwick, a Dartmouth College economics professor who until recently was chief economist of Bush's Council of Economic Advisers.

"I don't know a single business group involved in the judicial nominees," said R. Bruce Josten, an executive vice president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. "Nada, none, zip."

See the other links above; the obvious conflict is over stem cell research and biotechnology (more to come on this later). But in general, all this Dobsonite nonsense makes it hard to concentrate on what matters most to bidness–– and that would be making money. There are major fractures in the GOP coalition... an iffy economy is only going to make things worse, but if the Congress concentrates on the Dobsonites, the business agenda (CAFTA included) is going nowhere. . Those poor numbers Bush is racking up in recent polling are no accident; they may begin to include Main Street Republicans who want no part of a theocracy... strictly for business reasons.

Comments

[Crab Nebula]

However, some hard-right business people would love the commerce clause to go away (via 2-3 radical SC appointments), and for that they wouldn't mind sleeping with the relig. right. Seems that other saner R business types don't think this radically, fortunately.

My dream is that we get through this last Bush term with either 1 or zero SC appointments. That goes a long, long way toward mitigating the Nov 04 results.

[DHinMI]

Crab nails it. The extremists--the Stephen Moore types, and the Federalist Society true-believers--probably include some loons looking to deep-six the commerce clause. But they're a minority, and they're not in control of many of the major business groups. They tend to deal in reality, and going back to 1927 jurisprudence isn't on their agenda.

BTW, I'm shocked by Josten's comment. He is, iirc, the main policy guy for the national chamber. That's really something.

[RonK, Seattle]

Slightly O.T., Bush and DeLay are on the way to getting beat on stem cell research funding ... though it's not looking veto-proof at this point.

Commercial interests generally favor the U.S. staying in the game when new technologies (and industries) emerge.

[DemFromCT]

Not OT at all. When Page gets some sleep, she'll post on it. Here's a teaser:

From Gallup's Monday poll (subscription, used with written permission):

The May 20-22 CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll asked about stem cell research in a slightly different way, giving respondents four choices for what they think the government should do about stem cell research. A majority of Americans, 53%, either want no restrictions at all on government funding of stem cell research or want the restrictions eased. The rest are more conservative; 24% say keep the restrictions as they are (the position advocated by Bush), while a hard-core group of 19% wants no government funding of stem cell research at all.

If the Republicans in Congress pass a bill relaxing restrictions on stem cell research, it would run against Bush's wishes, suggesting divisions within the GOP on the issue. That's exactly what Gallup's Values and Beliefs poll shows -- 47% of Republicans say stem cell research is morally acceptable, while exactly the same percentage of Republicans say it is not.

In short, if Bush vetoes legislation that removes restrictions on stem cell research, he will please the majority of the religious right, but will leave about half of the members of his own party less than enthusiastic.

There is a more significant religious division on the issue, however. Christian evangelicals (about 22% of the population as defined by Gallup) are opposed to stem cell research by a 59% to 30% margin.

The tide is against the Bush/evangelical position, which is NOT a GOP position.

[praktike]

That article is bullshit. Brown and Owen and Myers are torpedos aimed at deregulation.

[DemFromCT]

Talk to some Repubs, praktike. It very much reflects the NE repubs I know. That, btw, doesn't make those three into 'moderate' judges. But this whole nuclear winter truly made the business community nervous. Too bad, because they need to get even more nervous if positive change is to happen.

[praktike]

"It very much reflects the NE repubs I know."

Is the Endangered Species Act still in effect?