According to conventional wisdom, Jeb Bush is a 2016 GOP presidential front runner. In fact, to a number of observers, it’s his to lose. And despite that immigration hiccup, his ongoing media offensive is a sure sign of top-tier status. This is not a long-shot’s game plan.
In addition, Jeb! has all that wonky-smart, bi-lingual, moderate-Republican gravitas from two turns as the can-do governor of America’s pre-eminent swing state. He also made history; he’s the Sunshine State’s only two-term GOP governor.
Having said all that, conventional wisdom is often more conventional than wise. Jeb does have some baggage, certainly enough to eliminate that exclamation point. Indeed, Charlie Crist isn’t the only prominent Florida pol toting around a political valise.
For openers, Bush is still lugging that devalued surname around. When he lost to Lawton Chiles in 1994, he relinquished his “anointed one” family status and propped open the door of opportunity for his less-talented brother, George W.–who is far from revered by Republicans, let alone the rest of the body politic. Something about a squandered surplus, a skewed tax, ill-timed deregulation and an unnecessary war and a Medicare prescription-drug benefit that went unfunded. Heckuva job, “W.”
Other presidential-wannabe GOPsters, including the combative Chris Christie, can disown “W” for besmirching the Republican brand. But a younger Bush brother doesn’t have that option. This isn’t Bill Clinton distancing himself from Jimmy Carter. Ideological fratricide is not politically or personally appealing.
Then add in intimations of monarchial inheritance. The prospect of a third Bush presidency in five administrations connotes entitlement. How un-Tea Party. Hell, how un-American.
Bush Scrutiny Coming
And since American politics continues to devolve into partisan, cherry-picking free-for-alls, Bush’s generally well-regarded Tallahassee tenure will be seen by many through a less-than-adoring, less-than-objective lens. Don’t be surprised, for openers, with agenda-driven references to:
* Bush leading the effort to repeal the high-speed rail amendment that would have connected Miami, Orlando and Tampa. Then being “surprised” and “taken aback” by Gov. Rick Scott’s refusal of federal high-speed rail funds without allowing bids. For many, eco-unfriendly gridlock is still an economic-and-lifestyle issue demanding unequivocally enlightened leadership–not ideology or politics as usual.
* Bush’s compromised position on off-shore oil drilling. Many still prefer that he be flat-out against it. Others think he didn’t go far enough. Likely not a net winner.
* Bush’s signing of “Terri’s Law”–later declared unconstitutional–that would have given government the right to the ultimate intervention in the case of the comatose Terri Schiavo.
* Bush presiding over 21 executions, not considered a moderate number, and zero commutations.
* While many see Bush as the avatar for educational accountability, others see nothing beyond a curriculum-skewing FCAT debacle as Bush’s biggest classroom impact.
* Bush’s Foundation for Excellence in Education can also be perceived as something other than an “education governor’s” legacy. More will be heard about charges that the ironically acronymed FEE circumvented applicable proscriptions and used donations from for-profit companies to lobby for state education laws that could benefit those companies. Donors included companies that sell–or would aspire to sell–testing and charter school services to the state and to Florida school systems.
Which brings us back to right now. Bush’s co-authored Immigration Wars: Forging An American Solution has provided him with a literal coast-to-coast forum. From the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, Calif. to the CPAC gathering in Washington, he’s been able to touch the requisite conservative bases. Plus all those political-junkie, network-and-cable-TV shows that predictably morph into “I’m not saying yes–I’m just not saying no” coy-a-thons.
But there’s that major, unforeseen problem: Bush’s calculated immigration position–to the right of his previously moderate one–looked a lot better in galley proofs last summer than in the context of today’s post-Romney-loss GOP that’s in major Hispanic-pander mode. Now Bush has to explain to Hispanics and Republican pragmatists why he agrees–in writing–with those who maintain that undocumented immigrants shouldn’t be given a pathway to citizenship.
Now he has to explain how he wound up to the right of Marco Rubio, whom he mentored, on immigration. Now he has to explain away a position on an issue that had been at the core of his “moderate” Republican image. It won’t be easy–no matter how he spins it–in either English or Spanish.
It’s a problem that the candid Christie–or the strategically “evolving” Rubio–doesn’t have.