Guardian of the Republic

by Allen West

  This is why, more than ever, I will stand as a conservative guardian of our republic. I clearly see the dangers ahead as we gradually loosen the ties that bind us and slip away from our governing principles. I do not believe I am alone, but I will stand alone if I must.

  Some would say America has failed, that the promise for which she once stood no longer exists. I believe that promise is greater than ever, but we must, as a nation, recommit to restoring it for the next generation. We can ill afford to cast aside the foundation on which this great nation was established.

  We are constantly bombarded with propaganda saying America is done and our country needs to be fundamentally transformed. My answer? Nuts! Where is the flaw in individual sovereignty? Who would say liberty and freedom are passé?

  Ronald Reagan reminded us, “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.” We must all join the fifty-six signers of the Declaration of Independence and take a sacred oath to preserve individual sovereignty for our children and grandchildren.

  Yet however strong our nation is within, we will forever face enemies from without. Though the goal of all men should be to live in peace, our founders understood that peace was not always possible. In the preamble of the Constitution, they clearly tasked the federal government with providing “for the common defense,” the fifth governing principle.

  The preponderance of constitutional duties for Congress as detailed in Article I, Section 8, are defense-related. If we have a limited government, it must recognize its preeminent responsibility is national defense. If that government is fiscally responsible, it must properly allocate funds to its vital task of maintaining an appropriate force, not bribing the public with the public’s treasury. To secure a thriving free market and trade, government must protect the sea lanes of commerce so that produced goods and services can be traded with allies and partners.

  We must ensure Americans will be safe and protected whenever they venture abroad, for as Justice John Jay stated well before the advent of ecotourism, spring break getaways, and luxury cruises, “the safety of the people, the regard of the individual freedom and sovereignty is paramount, not just at home, but wherever an American may travel.”

  Defense of our nation cannot be only reactive, it must be proactive. George Washington knew this when he said, “Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence … the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake; since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of Republican Government.”

  This is a delicate dance. In today’s world we are far more globally connected through commerce and technology. We must have a proactive foreign policy that promotes American interests without embroiling us in foreign exploits and ventures that erode our standing.

  Providing for the common defense is impossible without good care and gratitude for those who serve. In my lifetime I have personally seen fellow Americans wrongly aim derision at those returning from the battlefield rather than at those politicians in Washington who sent them there in the first place.

  As George Washington stated, “The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in any war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional to how they perceive veterans of earlier wars were treated and appreciated by our nation.” Never forget that our nation sleeps peacefully at night because rough men and women stand ready to do violence on her behalf.

  The sixth and final governing principle enables America to be the “shining city on a hill” for all the world to see. The essence of who we are as Americans, who our Founding Fathers established us to be, was stated clearly in the Declaration of Independence—our certain unalienable rights are endowed by our Creator.

  America was founded upon a Judeo-Christian faith heritage, not one specific religion. After all, it was for religious freedom that Europeans first came to our shores. Whether they were Pilgrims or Puritans, Protestants, Lutherans, Catholics, or even among the few dozen Jews who arrived at “New Amsterdam” in 1654, they all shared a belief in God. And however they worshipped, they all recognized that our fundamental rights, along with our fundamental understanding of morality, come from Him.

  So often we hear certain people complain and demand “separation of church and state” as if it were written into our laws. But that phrase does not appear in any of our founding documents: not the Declaration of Independence, the Federalist Papers, or the Constitution.

  The idea of “separation of church and state” was discussed by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, referring to the First Amendment’s assertion that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” The idea was to prevent the creation of a head of state who was also the head of the church, as was the case in England. There would be no national religion, nor would we prohibit the free exercise of any religion. Jefferson’s exact words were: “I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”

  Unfortunately, the loud and secular liberal Left wants us to believe that separation of church and state means actually separating America from its faith heritage, all in the name of political correctness and some absurd definition of tolerance. But our founders understood that without the moral compass of God to guide us, our nation would quickly run aground. “Those people who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants,” said William Penn.

  This moral compass is in part what makes our nation exceptional. Thomas Paine recognized that when he said, “The cause of America is in a great measure the cause of all mankind.” It is a cause we must ever renew, for it underscores everything we do for our citizens and our fellow men.

  Limited government, fiscal responsibility, a free market, individual sovereignty, a strong national defense, and an understanding that all our freedoms come ultimately from God—these are the governing principles bequeathed by our Founding Fathers, and they also form the basis of the conservative ethos. It is for this ethos I have fought and will continue to fight.

  Chapter 6

  PILLARS OF CONSERVATIVE THOUGHT

  Nothing creates jobs faster than … when people use the food stamps.

  —US REPRESENTATIVE NANCY PELOSI (D-CA)

  In politics, stupidity is not a handicap.

  —NAPOLEON BONAPARTE

  I’ve always believed conservatism is based on simple common sense, which, as the first statement above shows, seems to be in shorter and shorter supply on the Left. But as Emperor Napoleon pointed out, that’s really nothing new.

  In February 2011 I was a new member of the United States House of Representatives, having been sworn in a few weeks earlier. After a long day, I was with my chief of staff, Jonathan Blyth, at a favorite Chinese restaurant in the District of Columbia, chowing down on egg rolls and crispy General Tso’s chicken, when my chief took a call on his cell phone. The subject seemed serious, and Jonathan’s tone was solemn. He said, “I will discuss this with the congressman and get back to you, as he is right here with me.”

  Doggone, I figured I hadn’t been in Congress long enough to wreck things, so what was going on? Well, the call was from the American Conservative Union, and they had asked if I would be the keynote speaker for their flagship event, the Conservative Political Action Conference, CPAC 2011. In conservative circles the event is a pretty big deal, with nearly the entire who’s who list of past and current conservative leaders appearing during the four-day conference. I was of course honored to be invited. But the interesting part was that the invitation ca
me on Tuesday night and the conference started on Thursday. They wanted me to speak in just four days, on Saturday. I told Jonathan to call back and let them know we accepted the invitation. As we continued with our dinner, it slowly sank in what had just happened. I must admit, I did not sleep well that evening as I pondered what I would say.

  The next day I observed the news surrounding CPAC and looked for a theme I could develop. It had been a very successful midterm election for conservatives, and I certainly wanted to elaborate on that and congratulate those who had worked so hard. However, I also wanted to share key policy thoughts to help us begin to focus our efforts.

  I sensed that we conservatives had to do a better job of demonstrating why our principles of governance were superior to the alternatives being offered. I saw an internal struggle to define conservatism and its components. There were those people who wanted to discuss only certain aspects of conservatism but steer clear of others. It seemed to me we were fighting about yesterday when we should be thinking about tomorrow. And then, bam! I had it! The theme would be “The Dawn of a New America,” and I would refer to Ronald Reagan’s brilliant campaign advertisement “It’s morning in America.”

  To describe a new dawn and how to achieve it, I chose to speak about the three pillars of conservative thought, principles, and ideals. Now I’ll give you a tip. If you want to skip ahead, you can go watch the video of the entire speech online. But I hope you’ll hang out with me here so we can review the theme together.

  So far in this book we’ve examined the philosophical foundation for America. We’ve delved into the vision of the Founding Fathers and illuminated their governing principles as they established these United States of America. Now it’s time to talk specifically about modern conservative thought and the three pillars that support it.

  The first pillar is effective and efficient conservative government. Jefferson’s words, when he said, “most bad government results from too much government,” ring true with every modern conservative. He was absolutely correct. I challenge anyone to show me where expansive government has been beneficial to a society and its citizens. On the contrary, history is full of examples of this failure. When I listen to the news or read certain economic pundits, I’m amazed at how they continue to harp on the same tired talking point, “We need to spend more money.”

  I’m sick of hearing about government investments. Let’s call it what it is: government spending! By the time you’re reading this book, I presume our country will have eclipsed seventeen trillion dollars in debt and be on its way to another record annual deficit. We have had trillion-dollar-plus deficits for the past four years, and you’re telling me we need to spend more? Our elected officials complain about a silly 3 percent reduction in the growth of spending—nothing’s being cut, it’s simply not growing as much—instead of wholeheartedly assessing the size and scope of government.

  Entire government agencies have not met their intended missions and are failing in the execution of their tasks—particularly their most important task of being good stewards of the American taxpayers’ dollar. We are spending billions of dollars on redundant, duplicative, and ineffective government programs, yet it seems the only thing in nature that’s truly eternal is a government program.

  We saw the Obama administration create a new health-care entitlement program that the American people did not request. What Americans want is more jobs, yet at this writing, there are thirty-five million Americans unemployed, underemployed, or just plain discouraged.

  This monstrous health-care law creates almost 160 new government agencies and bureaucracies and countless new regulations that most people, including its authors, cannot comprehend or explain.

  Have we not learned our lessons about government meddling in the private sector? In 1977 President Jimmy Carter’s Community Reinvestment Act inserted the federal government into the mortgage industry. The result was the creation of toxic subprime mortgages and government-sponsored hotbeds of mismanagement such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, nefarious financial practices resulting from the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, and finally a financial meltdown in 2008. How long will it be until the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act decimates our economy?

  I say not long, because as of this writing, it’s already taking its toll, especially on small business owners. The health-care law is nothing more than a tax law, thanks to Chief Justice Roberts and the justices who voted with him. The “Individual Mandate Tax” joins the twenty other taxes in the law, of which eight had already taken effect in 2013, before the act was fully implemented.

  Our Founding Fathers were well aware that government expansion never has a happy ending, as they had experienced firsthand an intrusive and invasive government. The result was excessive taxation to support the whims of the crown. Today it’s no different, as we’re told to pay our “fair share” for the sole purpose of making government more bloated than it already is, against both our wishes and our best interests.

  There are some who say President Obama won election (twice) and should be allowed to do as he wishes. To that I respond with the words of Jefferson: “I think myself that we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious.”

  So what is the policy answer? We must no longer use the tax code as a weapon to fund ideological folly. We must move toward a flat tax system. In the meantime we reform our individual tax code to include only two tax brackets: a top level at 20 to 25 percent and a lower level at 15 percent. Everyone needs to have skin in this game. We should leave in place only two deductions: mortgage interest and charitable contributions. We should eliminate capital gains, death, and dividend taxes. Finally, to encourage business to stay on our shores, our corporate/business tax rate should be reduced to between 22 and 25 percent and loopholes and deductions eliminated.

  Along with tax reform must come a true, dedicated effort to make government effective and efficient. Above all, the federal government must stop being a venture capitalist—no more risky “investments” with taxpayer dollars. We should roll back the federal budget to the 2006 level and maintain it there until we get our annual deficits under control. We must analyze the scope of government with laser-guided precision, eliminate automatic annual increases in the budget, and start from zero each year.

  And instead of producing a string of continuing budget resolutions generally passed under some sort of emergency shutdown threat or other manufactured crisis, how about producing a real budget on time? Finally, while current federal government spending is close to 25 percent of our GDP, it must be capped at 20 percent, and the cap signed into law.

  And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how we ensure effective and efficient government, the first pillar of conservatism. Not sure why others have so much difficulty figuring it out …

  The second pillar of conservatism, and the one I spent most of my adult life protecting, is peace through vigilance, resolve, and strength. As I sit here writing, the television is tuned in to Fox News and I’m listening to a Wall Street Journal report addressing the North Korean threat and our nation’s response to it. I am unfortunately reminded of Sir Edmund Burke’s words: “All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”

  In 2011 North Korea sank a South Korean naval vessel and fired an artillery barrage onto a South Korean island—and we did nothing. Now it is 2013, North Korea is threatening nuclear war, the Muslim Brotherhood controls Egypt, Syria is in chaos, Iran’s nuclear capability and regional hegemonic dominance grows, and we’re doing nothing. We are certainly not showing resolve.

  Peace, and I mean real peace, begins with courageous leaders who are willing to identify and define our enemies and their objectives. Political correctness has no place in our national security strategy. Currently we have an administration more focused on integrating openly gay and lesbian troops and allowing women into ground combat arms billets than owning up to its constitutional responsibility as i
t applies to national security. The administration is more comfortable combating global warming and climate change than finding the terrorists who killed a US ambassador, two former US Navy SEALs, and another American in Benghazi.

  America cannot afford a Neville Chamberlain–esque security strategy that depends on the benevolence of despots, dictators, autocrats, and theocrats. I hate to remind everyone, but there are only two ways to end a war: you either win or lose. Quitting and going home because of a campaign pledge simply serves to embolden your enemies and abandon your allies.

  I know a thing or two about war, and I can tell you there are only two ways to get your enemies off the battlefield: you kill them or imprison them—and that doesn’t mean reading them Miranda rights and getting them all lawyered up. Terrorists do not deserve our constitutional rights, and to pretend that granting those rights gets us respect from our enemies is the most asinine concept I have ever heard.

  If we cannot adapt to the changing twenty-first-century battlefield with its nonstate, nonuniformed belligerents operating without respect for borders and boundaries, we are setting ourselves up for future attacks. We must have a completely different strategy for deployment and engagement against this flexible and fluid enemy. It’s time that we moved away from the idea of a large, standing “forward deployed” force, where units and resources are permanently stationed outside of the United States, to a rapid-response “power projection” force that uses our strategic and operational ability to deploy as our greatest asset.

  We must stop with the nation building and focus more on strike operations. We need a strategy across all our geographic areas of responsibility that provides the correct mix of forces, capacity, and capability to deny the enemy sanctuary, cut off his flow of men and material, win the information war, and cordon off his ability to extend his sphere of influence.