TO WIN the Democratic nomination and then the Presidency, Gary Hart must infuse his Kenedyesqsue rhetoric with Rooseveltian innovation. He must stop talking about a "new generation of leadership," and start explaining what bold, new, creative solutions he can offer. As Ronald Reagan is the philosophical descendant of Barry Goldwater, Gary Hart can be the heir of Camelot. Hart has cast himself as a progressive liberal; now he must offer--as Goldwater called it in 1964--"a choice, and not an echo."
So far, it seems, Hart has unveiled only one new idea, along with some vague new themes. His Individual Training Account--to be contributed to by both employer and employee--would be used to retrain workers in traditional and declining industries. It's a good idea, but it should be one of many, not the only one. Military reform and industrial policy are two themes Hart has often mentioned, but rarely explained. And neither is straightforward enough to evoke passion--much less interest.
Hart should announce a comprehensive plan of action to revive the economy. Why not set up a venture-capital agency to help start-up companies? Assemble twenty top corporate leaders to assess industrial prospects, and then let them choose high-growth sectors to invest in. Japan and West Germany have set up such programs with success.
On the international trade front, declare that the United States will match all its trading partners' import restrictions. We might be surprised how quickly their barriers go down if there's a threat that ours will go up.
Hart talks about "restoring compassion to our government...[and] providing new help to the people who most need the assistance of this nation...." Why not set a minimum level of income for all Americans and couple it with the so-called negative income tax? This tax would guarantee a minimum income without eliminating the incentive to become self-supporting. The plan has supporters on both sides of the political spectrum, including former Senator George S. McGovern and Nobel laureate Milton Friedman.
Nearly 70 percent of families below the poverty line are led by single women-Establish a national system of day-care centers to educate and feed poor children. Limited programs of this--Head Start is one--have been overwhelming successes.
Even the most prudent middle-class family can be devastated by unforseen medical bills. Every American should have access to immediate, safe, and affordable medical care. Hart should propose a program of national healthcare insurance.
Progress has been slow with environmental protection Try a different approach Virtually all professional economists favor taxing polluters per unit of discharge. Such a plan could save bilions of dollars, and, more important, provide unavoidable incentives not to pollute.
Hart talks about "restoring the fire of idealism" to public service. He should call for a program of national non-military service. In a kind of national Peace Corps, volunteers would help the poor and the homeless and the elderly all over the country. In return for their service, they would receive educational grants, thus ensuring that all Americans have the opportunity to go to college.
Hart correctly identifies that enemy south of the border as "hunger, poverty, and disease--not Communism." Why not propose a new Marshall Plan, but this time for South and Central America? We helped Western Europe after World War II not out of charity, but because we knew that a strong and independent Europe was essential to our economy and our security. So to with the Americas: help them develop into self-sufficient trading partners and allies, not industrial colonies.
THESE ARE new ideas in the progressive tradition: bold, creative, and experimental. But the path of progressive leadership through this century is still unfinished. It no doubt began with the New Freedom of Wood row Wilson, continued through Franklin D. Roosevelt '04's New Deal, and then the New Frontier of John Kennedy.
The election of 1984 may very well decide the future of progressive liberalism--and this country. Were the national vicissitudes of Vietnam, Watergate, and Ronald Reagan merely twists in the path? Or have we taken a different path altogether? To win the Presidency this year Gary Hart must craft a new vision; from his new rhetoric.