Cleveland
In his short time in the U.S. Senate, Utah Republican Mike Lee has distinguished himself as a policy innovator and a constitutional conservative who actually knows the Constitution. He has written two books, given a series of speeches outlining a substantive conservative policy agenda, and, last week, pushed the Republican National Committee to adopt reforms that would empower the conservative grassroots. He is widely recognized as one of the intellectual leaders of his party, and of Congress more broadly, even by those with whom he often disagrees.
Lee has also refused to endorse the presumptive Republican nominee for president, though in a reflection of his stubborn optimism and a fierce determination to be constructive, he has not entirely ruled out doing so. He sat down with THE WEEKLY STANDARD at the beginning of the convention that will officially make Donald Trump the GOP’s public face and de facto leader. Among the many topics we discussed: Utah as a swing state (Lee believes Hillary Clinton could win in November); the dissolution of the Republican party (Lee think such an outcome is possible); and how the modern Republican party resembles Van Halen without David Lee Roth (and he divulges who he believes is Sammy Hagar in that analogy). Here is the transcript, lightly edited for readability
TWS: Maybe a good place to start would be to reflect a bit on the last few days—what going through the Rules Committee process taught you, the lessons learned.
Lee: There’s a lot of support for reforms within the Republican Party, particularly changing the rules to make sure we remain a vibrant party, a party that welcomes grassroots participation and nurtures activists rather than shunning them. It was disappointing for me that we didn’t adopt some of those reforms.
The calls for those reforms are not going to disappear—they will remain there. I still think they need to be addressed and I hope and believe that they will be at some point.
On a Trump endorsement
TWS: On the big picture, where are you in terms of your support or potential support for Donald Trump as the Republican nominee, and does the selection of Mike Pence encourage you to consider support Trump?
Lee: Mike Pence is a good man and I think that choice made a lot of sense. I have not endorsed Mr. Trump and nothing about that has changed. I do see some opportunities for Mr. Trump.
On how Trump can win support from skeptical conservatives
Lee: I would like to think that I know a little bit about what people like me are thinking. Constitutional conservatives, grassroots conservatives want to see a presidential candidate who will stand for them, who will be an advocate for conservative positions that have been decidedly lacking for a long time.
TWS: Like what?
Lee: Well, for me, the most important feature of the Constitution is the fact that it constrains power. It prevents—it protects the American people from the dangers associated with the accumulation of power in the hands of the few. It does that along the vertical axis, by limiting the powers of the federal government in the first place, and it does that along the horizontal access by saying within the federal government Congress needs to make the law because Congress is the most accountable to the people, at the most frequent intervals of the three branches. That’s where the laws ought to be made and the laws ought to be enforced within the executive branch and interpreted within the judicial branch. We’ve departed from both of these protections and we’ve allowed far too much power to accumulate in Washington, generally, and in Washington we’ve allowed far too much power to be exercised within the executive branch.
If he could message that, there’s a lot of conservatives who could get excited about that, who could get excited about him. Because while we’ve had presidential candidates who have talked about that, and perhaps quite sincerely, I don’ t think we’ve had one in quite a while who has really made that a major focus. And I think there is not only room in Mr. Trump’s agenda for that, I think that is exactly what he needs. It would fit perfectly with his populist message.
TWS: Do you think Trump understands those things?
Lee: I don’t know. But he needs to understand them. As someone running for president, as someone running for president as a Republican, he needs to understand them. He’s got to understand them.
TWS: Have you seen any indication that indicates he’s willing to learn?
Lee: (Long pause) His Supreme Court list was great.
TWS: That was basically taken directly from the Heritage Foundation and passed straight through.
Lee: Regardless of how he came up with that list, he was listening to the right people. And that was good. No one can get elected as president of the United States as a Republican without grassroots activists, without the conservative grassroots activists. You know, it’s great that Mr. Trump has expanded the tent, that he’s brought a lot of people in who have not previously been with us, some of whom maybe have not voted at all recently, or at least haven’t voted Republican. I think that’s great.
It’s good, but it’s not sufficient. In order to have enough, he’s going to need those who have long fought for conservative principles on the ground. He’s going to need them to knock doors, to get their neighbors out. So, there are things he can do to get there. But he just needs to do them.
These aren’t complicated things. You don’t have to be somebody who has studied the Constitution for your whole life to understand. These are very simple principles. They’re principles that fit in well with his agenda. He’s reaching out to the disenfranchised, to the people who feel neglected, who feel like they’ve been left with the short end of the stick from government. And they have. He’s been very appealing to those who are upset and with good reason—who see people around them, who see the rich and powerful getting more rich and more powerful because of their status. All he needs to do is close that loop and complete the message, finish the sentence, by saying—
TWS: To push back a bit—Isn’t the problem that it’s unclear he believes in limited government at all, even on a fundamental level? Listen to the things he says when he campaigns. Half the time when you hear him on the stump, he’s talking about expanding government.
Lee: (Laughter) And now would be a very good time for him to embrace this message. (More laughter)
TWS: (Laughter) Fair enough.
Lee: Maybe he’s thinking those [limited government] thoughts in the back of his mind and he’s not expressing them. Perhaps someone has told him: “You can think those thoughts but don’t say them, because it’s not going to appeal to anyone and it’s not a good message.” Maybe that’s the case or maybe he’s not thinking about those things. Either way, it’s not to late for him to incorporate those into his agenda. And if he did he would win over the hearts and minds of a lot of people who are waiting for exactly that message to come along. And he could be a good messenger for that.
But this can’t just be a one-off speech that he gives.
On politics as real estate and safeguarding the Republican brand
TWS: Isn’t the potential problem that he would give it as a speech, that this message would be in the teleprompter, but that it would be, to use your word, primarily a “messaging” operation, and that it wouldn’t be fundamentally something he’s come to believe? I guess we might not know the difference.
Lee: Right, but that’s why giving it in a single speech isn’t going to do it. It has to be in a sustained, consistent part of his message. If it becomes that, that will be the indication that he understands it, that will be the indication that he believes it—if he sticks with it. If he does it, he’ll win a whole lot of people over.
There are a lot of people who are drawn to him naturally because he’s been successful in other fields. He’s been successful as a businessman. He’s a really successful real estate developer. And as such, he has built a whole lot of buildings, many of which have his name on them. Whenever he does that, knowing that his name is going to be on them, he, I’m sure, goes to great lengths to hire the right architects, the right interior designers, the right landscape designers. And the right people to make sure that that building represents him, his brand name, his company, his family well. He’s now running a presidential campaign with the Republican party. Those of us who are Republicans, lifelong Republicans, it’s a brand that we feel is at least in part our brand. All of us feel a sense of ownership of that brand. If he’s going to put our brand on that building, we want to make sure that they’ve got the right architect and that the person in charge of that project has a plan, a plan that is consistent with what we believe in. But he does have to it.
He would never hire someone to build a building for him—especially a building that was to have his name on it—if he didn’t know what the plan was, if he hadn’t seen the designs, if he hadn’t seen the 3-D models, if he hadn’t looked at the blueprints. And that’s what we need from him.
TWS: How patient are you willing to be in waiting for this? At what point do you say: “We’ve offered him constructive criticism and good advice. He’s clearly not taking it and I’m not voting for him”?
Lee: Four months, on the one hand, pretty short period of time. On the other hand, it seems like an eternity right now. He does have time. It is not a lot of time. Between now and November, I’m not sure where I would put the point of no return. But if he’s going to do this, he’s got to do it soon. And this week would be a really good opportunity for him. He’s got so many people coming together—many of whom are physically present—and a lot of whom will just be watching it from their homes across the country. I don’t think there will be a better opportunity than this week to lay out the blueprint, show us the 3-D model, tell us about your plans. Our brand is going to be on that building. We want to know what the plan is.
On Trump and a “binary choice”
TWS: And what do you say to Republicans and conservatives—movement conservatives, lifelong conservatives—who say: “I get what you’re saying senator, but if he does this, and gives a number of speeches, and does it for three or four months now, why would I believe that over what I’ve seen from him for the past year which, in many ways, points in the other direction?”
Lee: The other option right now is Hillary. And there are going to be Supreme Court vacancies, there is a Supreme Court vacancy right now, and for a lot of conservatives that is a reason to want to be able to support someone, anyone, other than Hillary who might be able to win. And I think it’s another reason why he does have an opportunity.
Now, I understand the concern you’re expressing and that is another reason why he’s got to act decisively and he’s got to act soon. Because the concern you’ve identified is a legitimate one. And I still think he can overcome it with most people who would express that concern if he starts acting now and he makes it a core part of who he is as a candidate.
TWS: Do you view this as basically a binary choice? Would you consider writing in a candidate or voting for the libertarian? Or do you believe, as the Trump folks would argue, that that’s effectively a vote for Hillary Clinton?
Lee: At this point, I don’t see a viable third party candidate.
TWS: I’m thinking more of somewhere to park your displeasure if you’re a voter who doesn’t like Trump and doesn’t like Hillary. Somewhere to register your views if you believe it’s important to say: “We’re not a part of this.”
Lee: Some, perhaps a whole lot, are going to end up doing that. Some people are going to do that. That’s inevitable. But how many? He can control the number of people who do that by making himself more appealing to conservatives. This is one of the reasons why he’s got to seize the opportunity. I do think there are opportunities for him this week, but he’s got to take them and he’s got to do it aggressively.
TWS: Most especially in his speech?
Lee: Yes, but I don’t want him, his campaign staff, or anyone else to put too much stock in this one speech. We’ve seen at previous Republican conventions, there are a lot of people who get up and knock it out of the park on one speech. That is a common tale. So it won’t be enough for him to knock it out of the park on one speech. It’s got to be a sustained thing. But it can start here.
TWS: Have you made this case to the campaign directly?
Lee: Oh, yeah.
TWS: And what’s the response? We haven’t seen it.
Lee: I have yet to hear anyone refute it.
On Hillary Clinton winning Utah
TWS: Let me ask about Utah. We’ve seen a number of polls that suggest that it’s a tight race in Utah, of all places. Do you buy these polls? And if so, how do you explain them?
Lee: Yes, I buy the polls. These polls are legitimate. They’re reading something very real that he ought to be concerned about. The good news is he can turn it around. He can turn it around in Utah just like he can turn it around elsewhere. There’s more to turn around in Utah than there are in a lot of other states.
TWS: Do you think it’s possible that we could wake up the day after the election and Hillary Clinton would have won Utah?
Lee: It is possible.
TWS: You look at Utah, that’s an incredible thing to say.
Lee: Utah has not voted for a Democrat in the presidential election since, I believe, 1964, seven years before I was born. So yeah, this would be a…
He could change that—he could win it handily if he provided a blueprint.
TWS: Experts seem to be dismissive of the polls in Utah or they offer a variety of explanations as to why we’re seeing Utah looking competitive. What’s your explanation?
Lee: All right, I don’t know that I can back this up empirically, but I’ll tell you what my gut tells me. Number one, his messaging style just rubs Utahns the wrong way. The confrontational, strident and occasionally in-your-face tone just culturally doesn’t wash well in my state. I’m not sure I can explain why—it’s just not the way it’s done in Utah.
Part of it, also, is that we have a natural sympathy for religious minorities, given that we are a religious minority, and one that has, at least in the past, endured a lot of religious persecution. And he is not necessarily known for being sensitive to issues faced by religious minorities.
TWS: (Laughter) That may be the biggest euphemism I’ve heard this year.
Lee: (Laughter) I’m trying to be constructive here. Hillary is no friend to religious liberty. That’s another reason he has this opportunity. The bar on the other side is so low.
On the end of the Republican party and Trump as Sammy Hagar
TWS: I’d like to talk about the modern conservative movement, the Republican party and where we go from here. Let’s assume, for the sake of discussion, that what we’ve seen from Donald Trump over the past year is what we see from Donald Trump for the next four months and, as well-meaning as your advice to him has been, he doesn’t take it, he campaigns as he’s been campaigning, does what he’s been doing, and loses. Where is the Republican party?
Lee: I don’t know. (Pause). I don’t know. In the past, for my entire life, the Republican party has been known as the natural refuge of the conservative. If we find ourselves with a candidate who doesn’t maintain that status, I don’t know what happens. I don’t know how to live in that world. I don’t know how the Republican party maintains its vitality. I don’t think it does.
TWS: Does that mean it comes to an end? There’s a new vehicle?
Lee: Look, when David Lee Roth left Van Halen, neither David Lee Roth nor Eddie Van Halen were enough on their own to keep things going. David Lee Roth actually did better on his own than Van Halen did without him. He continued—sorry, I didn’t mean to go off on a classic rock digression.
TWS: No, I like it. Who’s Sammy Hagar in all of this?
Lee: They just didn’t sound like Van Halen when Sammy Hagar came on. They were a different band. If you studied the music, if you read the sheet music, it’d be like, “Yes, that makes sense.” But you listen to it – it’s not Van Halen. Maybe Trump is Sammy Hagar? I don’t know. When the salt loses its savor, it’s not good for much. And, so, if conservatives no longer have a home in the Republican party—I hope that day never comes. If it does, something else will emerge as the home of conservatives.
On Trump as a conservative
TWS: Do you think Trump is a conservative?
Lee: I don’t know. Like I say, maybe he’s got this bold conservative message within him that I just haven’t heard yet. I keep hoping that’s the case. If it’s there, I’m not hearing it. I hear some things that sound kind of like it, but I’m not hearing it. The most conservative thing I’ve heard out of him was his Supreme Court short list, which was awesome. If I heard more stuff like that, then I could say, “Yes, that’s like me!” And I could start to get excited about it.
TWS: But he’s not going to be a new person, is he? You think he may have this conservatism inside of him and you’re hoping it’ll come out? I hear, for instance, Mitch McConnell talk about Trump changing. My view is: He’s not changing. He’s Donald Trump. And he won a bunch of primaries being Donald Trump. He’s not going to suddenly be a movement conservative.
Lee: But what if you’re mistaken? And what if deep down in there, there is something and he’s been suppressing it. I’m not saying that is the case but what if it were? What if somebody’s told him: “You can’t be that way?” What if he says, I haven’t completed the picture here. They’ve got a point: I haven’t given them a blueprint. And he lays out the blueprint and it’s a conservative blueprint. Even if that’s late in coming—which it would be—better late than never. At least that would give conservatives something to hang their hat on and say, “Yeah, maybe this party still is our home.”
On the possible damage from Trump to the GOP and conservatism
TWS: Let me do one more question on the long-term scenario. How great is the potential for real long-term damage if the Trump that we’ve seen so far remains. When you have Trump embracing arguments that are unconservative, one could argue anti-conservative, in some ways un-American, and you’ve got a party rallying behind him, what’s the long-term damage there? How do you reach out to religious minorities, if Trump isn’t elected, and he’s said what he’s said and the party embraced him? How do you reach out to Hispanic voters after what he said about the judge and the party rallied around him? It’s not like Republicans are going to be able to say: “We didn’t really know what he was all about.” He’s done all these things and the party rallied around him anyway. It’s a totally loaded question, obviously, but what do you do as Republicans to start rebuilding trust or begin building trust in the first place?
Lee: It’d be foolish to say that we’re past the point where that could still be done. It would be equally foolish to say that unless there is a course correction, all of those things are going to be very difficult for us. And we have to acknowledge that. All the more reason for us to change course.
I yearn for the day when certain things will no longer be news. I would love to see the day when it wouldn’t news if Donald Trump got up and gave a speech warning about the dangers associated with the abuse of government power, brought on by the concentration of too much power in the hand of the few. I look forward to the day when conservatives can have a candidate—I hope under the banner of the Republican party, but if not under the banner of some party, some entity—some candidate running for president who stand for conservative principles. I look forward to the day when it’ll no longer be news when Congress is actually taking steps to rein in executive overreach, to rein in the federal regulatory system and to do so with a mandate from the people who are made to understand number one Congress has cause this problem. This is not a problem that you can blame principally on the regulators. Congress has created that system.
TWS: By voluntary ceding the power to—
Lee: Yes, by outsourcing the task of making law to those who aren’t elected and never stand for reelection. Number one, where Congress address the fact that it is a problem of Congress’s own creation, number two, explains that this is what is causing so much angst and inequality and suffering on the part of so many people. The people who are hurt most by that problem—to much power in Washington and too much of that power in the hands of unelected bureaucrats—the overwhelming burden associated with that is borne by America’s poor and middle class.
I long for the day when it’s not news when Congress is doing something about that and when we’ve got a spokesman or spokeswoman as a conservative presidential candidate who will stand boldly and aggressively for those principles.
On reaching the bottom and hope from Winston Churchill
TWS: You think we’ll have that day?
Lee: Yes. I take a lot of comfort—I’m not sure why—I cite this over and over again like a mantra, like a scripture. Winston Churchill supposedly said: “The American people can always be counted on to do the right thing, after they’ve exhausted every other alternatives.” And that’s where we are. We have exhausted every alternative and this is all that’s left.”
