by Bobby Jindal
But step outside the world of campaign strategists—which is a parallel dimension in time and space if you ask me—and look at reality. What you discover is that this view simply doesn’t reflect the real world. The theme of this chapter is going to be regarded as heresy by both Republican and Democrat strategists, but here it goes: there are more important things than the economy.
During political campaigns, both parties divide people’s interests and concerns into neat little categories. Well-paid pollsters discern people’s attitudes by splicing and dicing. They poll about healthcare, foreign policy, defense, the economy, and moral issues. Our political dialogue is conducted in much the same way. Pundits go on the cable networks and pontificate on some narrow subject, then give way to other pundits sharing their expertise on some other narrow subject.
But that is not how real life works. All these issues are interconnected. Like spokes in a wheel, they are all linked to one central hub: America’s culture.
The word culture comes from the Latin word cultura, which means to cultivate. Our culture—our shared set of values, goals, and attitudes—defines who we are as a nation. And everything else—foreign policy, social policy, and yes, even the economy—springs from it. Culture is not merely the social issues or the moral issues that pollsters and pundits discuss. Culture is much more than that. Our culture defines what we strive for, what we value, and how we conduct ourselves as a people.
The beauty and promise of America is not our economic system—even though it has helped us to generate amazing prosperity. The beauty of America is not our political system—great as our form of government is. The beauty of America is not our military superiority—even though it can really come in handy.
The beauty of America is our culture. Our culture is the glue that keeps us together and the engine that makes the American Dream possible.
Let’s take these assertions one at a time, beginning with the first—that the beauty of America is not in our economy. Now, if you’ve read this far in the book, you have probably noticed that I’m a zealous proponent of free enterprise and an unapologetic advocate of American capitalism. I have written for the Wall Street Journal and spoken at the Hoover Institution and the Heritage Foundation. I even own an Adam Smith tie.
In fact, since I became governor of Louisiana we have cut taxes several times, including the largest income tax cut in our state’s history, and we have eliminated over 6,000 government positions. We aren’t just talking about fiscal responsibility and conservative economic principles; we are actually applying them to solve problems. In short, I’m an economic conservative if there ever was one, not just in theory, but in practice.
But I’ll be honest with you: I wouldn’t give you a plug nickel for capitalism and free enterprise in a country where people don’t play by the rules, don’t respect the rule of law, don’t share a common view of the dignity of all mankind as God’s creation, or generally don’t care for one another. Capitalism in such a society will fail. Even my tie tells me so, or at least the man on my tie.
Adam Smith wrote his masterpiece, The Wealth of Nations, to describe the power, morality, and efficiency of a market economy. He explained how the profit motive—the desire to make money—created incentives to be productive. In other words, selfishness was a good thing because it motivates people. But Smith also wrote The Theory of Moral Sentiments, which he considered his most important work. Smith argued here that the free market system would not work well—and could even bring out the worst in some people—in a society that lacked a strong moral foundation. Values like propriety, prudence, and benevolence are needed to check our inherent selfishness, Smith argued. And he didn’t just preach this—he actually lived it, becoming famous in his native Scotland for his charitable efforts. Although he made a fortune during his lifetime, when Smith died his estate was minuscule because he had given away so much of his wealth.
America was founded on strong Judeo-Christian moral values, but some of these have weakened in recent years. This has given us a bitter taste of the consequences of embracing Smith’s economic theory without the moral prerequisites. The economic meltdown our nation experienced was in large part brought on by unchecked avarice. Adam Smith would have seen it coming.
We now know, for example, that subprime lenders were selling loans they knew were toxic. The Securities and Exchange Commission has released the email records of Angelo Mozilo, the CEO of Countrywide, as part of a civil suit that was filed against him. In those emails we discover that while Mozilo was pushing subprime loans and crowing publicly about how good they were, privately he was telling a colleague, “In all my years in business I have never seen a more toxic product.” In another email he wrote that the no-money-down mortgage—another instrument he was touting publicly—was “the most dangerous product in existence and there can be nothing more toxic.”1
Numerous other examples abound. According to the Wall Street Journal, in late 2006 Goldman Sachs executives were already convinced that the “sub-prime market was heading for trouble.” So what did they do? They sold off their “stockpile” of mortgage-backed securities and effectively started selling short, that is, betting that the market would go down. But what did they tell their clients? They encouraged them to keep buying these toxic investments. Goldman Sachs made $4 billion from selling these securities. Their clients didn’t do so well.2
Other reports looked at the leadership at Bear Stearns, the investment house that imploded and had to be bought out in March 2008. It explained how the CEO, in the months leading up to the crisis, spent a lot of time playing golf, enjoying bridge tournaments, and even smoking dope, all the while being well compensated for his efforts.3
I once read somewhere that the love of money is the root of all evil.
But let’s not stop there. Banks made loans to people they knew could not afford them. There were so-called liar loans (where they didn’t even ask to see proof of your income) and even NINJA loans (no-income, no-job loans). Handing out these disastrous loans became a common practice in an industry focused more on earning fast commissions and fees than doing due diligence and responsibly handling its business. The greed was so extensive it was almost comical. Washington Mutual, once the sixth largest bank in the country, gave a loan to a non-English speaking strawberry picker in California earning $14,000 a year. The loan was for $720,000.4 Did I mention Washington Mutual had to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy?
Politicians played their part in stoking the crisis. In hopes of appealing to specific demographic groups, they pressured banks to give risky mortgages to homeowners who were extremely unlikely to pay them back. Regulations like the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) forced banks to make loans based not on the applicants’ merits, but because they had to strike agreements with radical “community” groups such as ACORN. In fact, the federal government sued banks to force them to make risky mortgage loans. Andrew Cuomo, secretary of Housing and Urban Development during the Clinton administration, bragged at a 1998 press conference about reaching a settlement with a major lender worth billions of dollars. Cuomo even admitted he knew some of these loans would not be paid back.5 Nice thing to do with other peoples’ money.
Some of the blame also belongs to consumers, who borrowed money they knew they couldn’t repay. Interest rates were low and mortgages were easy to get, and lots of people jumped at the opportunity to buy a bigger house than they could really afford. So they traded up and borrowed more than they could handle because, well, we all deserve a big house, don’t we? Owning a home is part of the American Dream. But getting it through an interest-only adjustable rate mortgage is more like a nightmare.
Predictably, after the meltdown liberals called on the government to adopt strict new regulations to ensure it will not happen again. (Good luck with that.) But more regulations can’t solve what is largely an ethical problem within the culture. Unchecked avarice at every level has taken its toll on our economy.
I have no doubt we will overcome the ec
onomic crisis. But if we want to prevent a similar crisis from erupting in the future, we need to recommit our nation to the bedrock values that keep us committed to doing the right thing. We cannot serve both God and Mammon.
MSNBC anchor Contessa Brewer recently advised Republicans to “focus away from morals and values into things that affect people’s lives.” Her guest, New York Times reporter John Harwood, agreed: “Well, bingo, Contessa, that’s exactly right.”6 This couldn’t be more wrong—morals and values affect everything in people’s lives. Republicans taking campaign advice from the media is like a chef getting culinary advice from cannibals—it won’t end well. Still, some Republicans are tempted by this argument. They believe we’ll get more votes by focusing on free market economics and ignoring all that “divisive” talk about values and morality. The trouble is that the world doesn’t naturally divide into neat categories. If we focus narrowly on political strategy and ignore more fundamental issues of right and wrong, we will fail. That great campaign consultant Confucius had some applicable thoughts: “The superior man understands what works; the inferior man understands what sells.”
Think about why America, the wealthiest nation in world history, still suffers from social ills such as child poverty. The truth is, economics alone are not to blame. Studies consistently show children in broken homes are four times more likely to live in poverty. The poverty rate for children of married couples is 8.2 percent, compared to 35.2 percent—four times higher—for children of single parents.7
While recognizing the heroic work done by single moms across the country, we cannot ignore the evidence that families matter, that children of two parent households tend to do better, and that the family unit is the foundation of society. When America launched the war on poverty in 1965, the child poverty rate was 20.7 percent. More than forty years later, the rate is only slightly lower.8 We have spent trillions of dollars to fight poverty with meager results. Why? Because simply throwing money at the problem will not fix it. Poverty, like so many other economic problems, is not simply about money. It’s about values that work.
I also said the beauty of America is not in our political system. Most of us are taught at an early age about the glories of our system of government. And there is no question that the elegant brilliance of our Constitution is to be marveled at. It is the best system of government ever created.
But our republic rests on self-government. That requires people to share a common commitment to virtue, to mutual respect, to core values, to doing unto others as you would have them do unto you, to selflessness, and to “peace, patience, kindness, and self-control.” (I took that from a certain ancient manuscript.) Our Founding Fathers understood that we can’t put our trust in our structure of government alone. George Washington in his Farewell Address recognized morality, faith, and our values as essential to our political survival. “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable support.” He concluded by observing that “virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government.” Note that he didn’t say helpful; he said necessary.
Samuel Adams argued that if you want to see America prosper, you will devote your time and energies to promoting virtues and values. “He therefore is the truest friend to the liberty of his country who tries most to promote its virtue, and who, so far as his power and influence extend, will not suffer a man to be chosen into any office of power and trust who is not a wise and virtuous man.” Personally, I’d rather take the advice of Sam Adams than those talking heads on MSNBC.
Democracy simply won’t work among a people characterized by selfishness, greed, malice, or lawlessness. Fortunately, America has traditionally been kept on the right path thanks to our commitment to faith and religious values. Alexis de Tocqueville visited America in the nineteenth century and wrote his celebrated book Democracy in America . As he described it, “On my arrival in the United States the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there, the more I perceived the great political consequences resulting from this new state of things.” He continued,
Religion in America takes no direct part in the government of society, but it must be regarded as the first of their political institutions.... I do not know whether all Americans have a sincere faith in their religion—for who can search the human heart?—but I am certain that they hold it to be indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions. This opinion is not peculiar to a class of citizens or to a party, but it belongs to the whole nation and to every rank of society.9
De Tocqueville noted that at the time the “enlightened” philosophers in Europe were turning their backs on faith and arguing that religion and freedom were incompatible. (Sound familiar?) But de Tocqueville saw that America was proving them wrong. “Unfortunately facts by no means accord with their theory,” he wrote. “There are certain populations in Europe whose unbelief is only equaled by their ignorance and debasement; while in America, one of the freest and most enlightened nations in the world, the people fulfill with fervor all the outward duties of religion.”10
What de Tocqueville described still holds true today. As the late-Harvard professor Samuel P. Huntington put it, “Religion has been and still is a central, perhaps the central, element of American identity. America was founded in large part for religious reasons, and religious movements have shaped its evolution for almost four centuries. By every indicator, Americans are far more religious than the people of other industrialized countries.”11 If we are feeling lost and wondering what our national purpose and direction should be, Huntington argued that we will find the answers by looking at our faith and culture.
Our faith, values, and culture bind us together. If we lose our commitment to common values, the country will inevitably fragment. Aristotle understood this and believed it to be the hub in the wheel. Without a common morality, he warned, a political community would become “a mere alliance.”12
This makes the United States unique among the nations of the world. As I mentioned earlier in this book, most national identities are tied to geography or ethnicity. Americans are different. We recognize the beauty of our country, but we don’t call ourselves Americans because of the soil beneath our feet. Back in 1849 a European visitor noted that an “American exhibits little or none of the local attachments which distinguish the European. His feelings are more centered upon his institutions than his mere country. He looks upon himself more than in the light of a republican than in that of a native of a particular territory.... Every American is thus, in his own estimation, the apostle of a particular political creed.”13
Nor is it simply our common history that makes us Americans. We should be inspired by what occurred at Plymouth Rock and Gettysburg, but these events are examples of what it means to be an American—they don’t make us Americans. There are millions of Americans such as myself who don’t have any familial link to those historical events but who are touched by them because they reveal values.
What defines us are our values and ideals, our commitment to individualism, a spirit of independence, limited government, and the American spirit. The Founding Fathers identified these values for us in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. They also selected three Latin phrases to define our republic. The first is well known: E pluribus unum (“From many one”). The other two, which you don’t hear much about anymore, speak to the Founders’ sense of the historic nature of the American project. One phrase was Annuit coeptis (Providence has favored our undertakings); the other was Novus ordo seclorum (A New Order for the ages).14 Clearly, from the very beginning our Founders were motivated by a sense of American exceptionalism. And what make us exceptional are our culture and our national ideals.
Our political system has worked brilliantly for more than two centuries because it could rely on a culture in which people share a common commitment to doing the right thing. As John Adams warned, “Our Constitution was m
ade only for a moral and religious people.”15 Without that, even a democracy could simply become the will of the mob.
Finally, the beauty of America is not our military superiority.
We live in a dangerous world, and America needs to be strong. U.S. Senator Phil Gramm used to say that if the lion and the lamb are going to lie down together, I’d just as soon that America be the lion. That’s a good point—and I’d add that the lion and the lamb are not likely to lie down together in this lifetime.
We must remain not just strong, but the strongest power in the world, and we should make no apologies when we must use our military strength from time to time. But this is not where our true strength lies. Military might is a means to an end, not an end in itself. A strong military in the hands of a corrupt, wicked, or oppressive regime does not make that regime great.
Both George Washington and Abraham Lincoln were effective and successful leaders because they held core values that kept them focused on right and wrong and also kept them humble. Both of them proclaimed various days of thanksgiving and fasting. The goal was, in the words of Lincoln, to create “a day of public humiliation, prayer and fasting, to be observed by the people of the United States with religious solemnities.” Both leaders accepted their accountability to God and showed the humility that flows from it.
Having military superiority is great—but it has to be tethered to a culture that promotes goodness, freedom, and justice. Without that, we would be no better than the old Soviet Union.
To sum up, American capitalism is great, American democracy is great, and American military power is great. Put me down as being for all three. But the success of America does not rely on these things alone.