El establishment republicano contraataca

Matt Bai, del New York Times, disecciona al establishment republicano y analiza su papel en estas elecciones en un reportaje de 10 páginas de obligada lectura.

You can’t talk about the Republican establishment without trying to define what that really means, and this is something on which there is little consensus. Last month, I sat with Fred Malek in the Washington office of his private-equity firm. Malek, now 74, was in charge of fund-raising for his friend John McCain in 2008 and does the same job for the Republican Governors Association. He’s the founder of the American Action Network, a two-year-old group whose goal is to make the party’s economic agenda palatable to mainstream Republicans and independents. Malek belongs to the Alfalfa Club, whose 200 or so members, the old-line political and business aristocracy in both parties, expect the president to attend their annual dinner, and he occasionally gives exclusive parties at his home overlooking the Potomac River in McLean, Va. — including one in 2009 that brought together Sarah Palin and the party’s Washington elite.

“You think I’m an establishment Republican?” Malek asked me.

When I said that I did, he let forth a lyrical string of expletives that, sadly, are not printable here. “My dad drove a beer truck delivering beer to taverns in Cicero and Chicago, Ill.,” he said. “I’m the first one in my family to go to college. No, I don’t consider myself part of the establishment.”

I then followed his gaze to the photos on his wall: Malek in the Oval Office with Richard Nixon, Malek with Ronald Reagan, Malek with George H. W. Bush after the two jumped from a plane on the former president’s 80th birthday.

“I’m looking for pictures on my wall to prove I’m not establishment,” Malek said.

I suggested he might need to find another wall, and Malek laughed in surrender.

George Will recently said there is no such thing as the Republican establishment, which is a little like Michael Douglas saying there’s no such thing as Hollywood. But Will’s point, shared by a lot of other longtime Republicans I spoke with, is that the real establishment, the league of Protestant lawyers and bankers from the Northeast and Midwest who once exercised enormous influence, was smashed in 1964 when Barry Goldwater, acting as the advance guard for a new breed of ideological conservatives from the West and South, wrested the nomination from Nelson Rockefeller. (Among Goldwater’s most vocal G.O.P. opponents at that time was a liberal Midwestern governor named George Romney.) Since then, this argument goes, the idea of any singular establishment has been little more than a convenient media conceit.

It’s a fair point, but it may be just as accurate to say that the establishment has simply evolved over the years to accommodate more regional and cultural diversity, making it less monolithic but still ideologically cohesive. The pragmatic “white shoe” lawyers of the Nixon-Rockefeller era were largely stamped out over the ensuing decades by more conservative Reaganites from the West Coast and Bush backers from Texas, by movement conservatives whose constituents included evangelicals and libertarians and neoconservative defense hawks. They don’t all belong to the same country clubs, but they have retained a remarkable ability to mobilize around a series of candidates and legislative objectives.

Today’s establishment is really a consortium of separate and overlapping establishments: a governing establishment of those who have served in administrations or in Congress; a political establishment of campaign consultants; a media establishment dominated by Fox News or the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal and a policy establishment at organizations like the American Enterprise Institute and the Heritage Foundation.

If there is any one power center that connects all of these, though, it’s what you could call the money establishment — the group of senior Republicans, many of whom came to Washington as ideological warriors in the 1980s or early ’90s, who now make their living principally through the business of government.

* Artículo completo.