Newt Gingrich Gets Mixed Marks from Club for Growth

The conservative Club for Growth organization released the first of its white papers on the candidates who are running for the Republican presidential nomination and looked at former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia.

As a historical figure, it is undeniable that Newt Gingrich has played leading roles in some of the most important battles on behalf of economic growth and limited government in the last quarter century, noted the club. His opposition and momentary defeat of the 1990 Bush tax increase, his leadership of the 1994 Republican Revolution, and his spearheading of the provisions of the Contract With America are major league achievements.His consistent support for pro-growth tax reform, free trade, Social Security reform, tort reform, and political free speech also evidence a clear and impressive understanding of the fundamentals that underlie the free-enterprise system that has made America prosperous.

Unfortunately, the problems in Speaker Gingrichs record are frequent enough and serious enough to give pause, continued the club.On two of the most important recent issues that confronted limited government conservatives (creating the new budget-busting Medicare drug entitlement, and the Wall Street bailout), Gingrich was on the wrong side.His advocacy of an individual health care mandate is problematic. His penchant for tinkering with rewards for favored industries and outcomes shows a troubling willingness to use federal power to coerce taxpayers into his preferred direction. And his occasional hostility toward conservatives who do not share his desire to support liberal Republicans or to compromise on matters of principle is worrisome.

The totality leads one to be rather unsure what kind of president Newt Gingrich would be, they concluded.Past is often prologue, and in Gingrichs case there is an enormous volume of past on which to base a judgment. One could reasonably expect a President Gingrich to lead America in a pro-growth and limited government direction generally, possibly with flashes of real brilliance and accomplishment, but also likely with some serious disappointments and unevenness.