I believe that the presidential election in 2016 must be a turning point.

A veritable “Time for Choosing” in our own lifetime, the citizens of this great nation must, as Reagan exhorted, decide “whether we believe in our capacity for self-government, or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.”

Despite plummeting congressional job approval ratings and growing dissatisfaction with the corruption and excesses of our federal government, the American populace continues to delegate more of its decision making power to our elected officials.

We have heaped issues traditionally solved by individuals and the private sector onto the shoulders of an already burdened, downtrodden, broken, and gridlocked Leviathan.

The Democratic candidate in 2016 will undoubtedly champion this paternalistic role for the state, while the Republican will argue the opposite.  Anyone attentive to politics in the last century is cognizant of these two strains of argument.  Past conservative candidates have argued passionately for reducing the size and and scope of government, with varying degrees of success.  A valid and worthwhile argument, the state has grown so large that its immediate reduction is virtually untenable.  Benefits of what political theorists term “the modern welfare state” cannot be retracted so easily.

Republican candidates historically have made governmental reduction a focal point of their campaigns.  They—and this argument—are tired.

In the last three decades, many notable Republicans have aspired to attain the highest office in the land.  The 2016 convention should not be focused upon finding a better candidate to place on the ballot, as one may not exist.  Rather, the Republican Party must focus on a better argument.

The growing factionalism within the Republican Party itself only hinders its causes.  A further embodiment of the partisanship and irreconcilability characterizing government today, this split serves to alienate, rather than inspire, voters.

I believe that the Republican Party must improve their arguments about immigration and education.  Unsurprisingly, these two policy areas are inextricably linked.

Over the past decade, immigrant minorities have accounted for 85 percent of the nation’s population growth.  With increasingly larger numbers of Hispanic immigrants, the composition of our nation is changing, and our politics must change with it.

Though a broad category including many nations and cultures, Latinos as a whole have historically embodied the core values of traditional conservatism.  Jeb Bush and Clint Bolick wrote in their book Immigration Wars that Latinos share the values of a strong work ethic, devotion to family, and conservative social values.  They believe America encourages and rewards hard work while providing the opportunity for individual betterment through education.

Reagan famously quipped that, “Latinos are Republicans.  They just don’t know it yet.”  If the Republican Party can restructure its arguments to focus primarily upon school choice and educational opportunities for immigrant children, Republican candidates may be able to inspire Latino immigrants to support their other causes.

Newly naturalized Latino families typically settle in areas with poor public education systems, despite immigrating to America in order to increase educational opportunity for their children.  Most cannot afford to send their children to private schools.  By championing school choice and voucher programs for private, and even religiously affiliated schools, Republicans can help the fastest growing sector of our nation’s population.

Currently, American public schools are failing these immigrant children.  Poor public school systems in states with large Latino concentrations such as Florida, New Mexico, and Arizona fail to cultivate what could be a massive influx of social capital.

Throughout the next presidential election, the Republican Party should prioritize strong, innovative arguments, not famous names and faces.  The Democratic Party will probably settle for the latter.  An appeal to Latino Americans that emphasizes the decentralization of our nation’s education system may be the first step toward reinvigorating the federalism upon which our great nation was founded.  Our nation’s foremost priority should be returning autonomy to its citizens.  Expanding educational choice and opportunity for all children, especially those families who seek a new beginning in America, represents an inventive idea that conservatives may choose to champion in years to come.

 

Kate Hardiman is a sophomore majoring in the Program of Liberal Studies and minoring in Political Science, Economics, and Philosophy (PPE). Contact her at khardima@nd.edu if you wish to discuss education policy.