A lot of ink has been spilled lately, on both sides of the aisle, on the subject of Ronald Reagan and his proper place on the ideological spectrum. Liberals like to point out his many heresies against conservatism. Moderate Republicans, feeling unwelcome in the modern GOP, like to do the same. Conservative Republicans tend to simply ignore the details of his record in favor of exalting him as the ideal political leader. Even as the Bushes are being pushed out of the conservative movement (and, therefore, the Republican Party), Reagan remains above reproach.
My theory on this is that Reagan was the first conservative to fight his way from the kiddie table to the big table with all the adults. Prior to his ascent in 1980, conservatives weren’t taken seriously and didn’t get any respect. By the standards of the time, Reagan’s presidency was unprecedented in its conservatism. But for his entire presidency he had to deal with a Democratically-controlled House of Representatives and for the last two years he had to deal with a Democratically-controlled Senate, too. If he had enjoyed a more sympathetic and cooperative Congress, his record would be much more conservative than it is. What Reagan did for conservatism, more than anything else, was place conservatives in positions of authority where they could for the first time have real influence. A good example of how this paid off later on is Antonin Scalia’s record on the Supreme Court. But there are many other examples.
I think it’s fair to say that Reagan wasn’t as mean-spirited as later conservative leaders like Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay, or Eric Cantor. He wasn’t hateful like Republican mouthpieces Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh. But he was more conservative than his record. And he had some idiosyncrasies, too, like his aversion to nuclear weapons and his relaxed attitude about undocumented Mexican workers, that didn’t mesh with conservative orthodoxy.
Those type of issues present a more compelling argument that Reagan wouldn’t be welcome in the modern GOP than his willingness to compromise on taxes and social policy with a Democratic Congress.
Personally, I think Reagan would be concerned about the tone of the modern GOP more than with their radical vision for smaller government. In many respects, I think the present-day radicals are carrying forth a program that Reagan self-consciously started. On the other hand, I don’t think he would approve of the way the GOP has taken obstruction to the point that it threatens the economic reputation of the country. I believe he would have considered it the Republicans’ responsibility to work with the president, just as Tip O’Neill’s Democrats worked with him to shore up Social Security, do immigration reform, and to rewrite the tax code.
