McCain, the Social Right, and the Problem of Judges

Carl Hulse has a fascinating article in Monday's New York Times. The article posits that McCain's role in avoiding the so-called nuclear option (i.e. destroying the filibuster to ensure nominations to the federal bench would get a confirmation vote) is now hurting his support among social conservatives. The article is worth the read but I have a few additional thoughts...


1. If the article is correct, then the social right seems to have abandoned hope of achieving their objects through traditional political venues. I, and many others, have long argued that the social right's agenda has been "deferred" to the courts. The politics of the social right have been transformed into a politics of conservative jurisprudence, which leaves the economic wing free to focus the Republican Party's energy on its agenda--be it deregulation, terrorism, or tort reform. Under this paradigm, the social right has been marginalized but, seemingly, they have not realized the degree to which they've been marginalized (although the strength of Huckabee's campaign may speak to a growing consciousness). However, they may have been willing to play along so long as nominees to the Supreme Court looked more like Samuel Alito and less like Harriet Myers. McCain, already suspected by the social right of not being particularly orthodox, jeopardizes the old paradigm as he placed institutional maintenance (i.e. senatorial filibuster) ahead of judicial conservatism. Now that social conservatives are so very close to having five jurists they believe to be orthodox on issues like school prayer and abortion, taking a chance on the "centrist" McCain and a Democratically controlled Senate is akin to Sherman turning around just as he sees Atlanta on the horizon. (Odd analogy, I know...)



2. This could be troubling times for the Republican Party. When original agreements breakdown, coalitions often disintegrate. The social right must feel it can not win politically absent a "new awakening". Now, their party is causing conservatives to doubt its commitment to a legal victory. When a party no longer provides the proper incentives for its members to continue its loyalty, you see either demobilization or defection. The latter is unlikely given that there is no where to go (unless a third conservative party movement occurs but those are usually quite short lived). But demobilization is notable as social conservatives were the driving force behind Bush's 2000 and 2004 electoral successes. Given that the Democratic Party is highly mobilized and you have the potential to have a demobilized wing of the Republican Party, the Dems could be on the verge of a major victory in November.

However, to prevent such a catastrophe, look for McCain to find religion on conservative judges and spend some time assuaging folks like James Dobson and Pat Robertson. But, as Hulse points out, this is a harder task for McCain than most Republican presidential nominees in the recent past.