A Blueprint to Raise Up Those in Need

The following excerpts are from “Underserved: Harnessing the Principles of Lincoln’s Vision for Reconstruction for Today’s Forgotten Communities” by former Trump White House officials Ja’ron Smith and Chris Pilkerton. Smith and Pilkerton spearheaded many of the Trump administration's most important domestic policy achievements for America's underserved. Inspired by President Lincoln's original vision for Reconstruction, the book draws from history's greatest political thinkers and the authors' own White House experiences to provide a blueprint for policymakers to uplift underserved communities. 

It is available to order here. 

What does it mean when the Republican party is referred to as “the party of Lincoln,” and even more to the point, is that moniker still accurate? Technically, Abraham Lincoln was the first Republican president—or at least the first to be elected under the name of that party. He is often cited as the standard-bearer, but he was not a perfect man.

But Lincoln evolved. It was he—as a Republican—who led Emancipation. It was he—as a Republican—who started the road to universal suffrage. His successor, President Johnson, was unable to effectively lead due to his own history of racism, arrogance, inept stewardship, and seeming disregard for the entirety of what America aspires to be. President Grant picked up the mantle of Lincoln, but he could not revive and complete Lincoln’s intended vision for Reconstruction.

Is it fair to say that men like Lincoln, Grant, and Stevens laid the groundwork for the party of freedom and opportunity? The evidence suggests that the answer is yes. And why can that be said with such confidence? Because what makes politics work is the aspirational coupled with the intentional. This is what modern Republicans must aspire to be as a group of individuals committed to the advancement of all people.

A skeptic may seek to criticize that position and point to contemporary political statements they deem to be inconsistent with that goal. Politics is one thing. Politics is composed of sound bites and stump speeches. Policy is different. It is the action-oriented plan that lays out what success can look like, and does so in a way that stays true to the party’s principles. For Republicans, this means the principles set forth by Presidents Lincoln and Grant and supported by great leaders such as Frederick Douglass. The objective is to create a truly civil society—or a community of citizens linked by common interests and collective activity. 

Conservative organizations seek to build on this by advocating that families, religious institutions, and individuals are at the heart of America’s thriving civil society, providing for the welfare of communities in ways that the government cannot. 

The system of capitalism that has allowed companies to achieve so much can also provide for greater social impact than any other economic system in human history, because it gives citizens the greatest opportunity to pursue their dreams. To ensure that the benefits of capitalism are accessible to underserved communities, any plan that incorporates the private sector must begin by focusing on the practical application of the social component of ESG, so that corporations as well as the broader community and its stakeholders reap the benefits.

It is easy for a politician to offer a sound bite on supporting more of any program, but it is quite another thing to examine actual data that results in generational perpetuation of the problem. The same politicians who disregard the facts and double down on these types of programs could very well be acting in their own self-interest, given that financial assistance to their communities might immediately result, but those politicians do not have to answer to the generations that follow. Their behavior is the epitome of inefficiency and irresponsibility, yet it has not only been permitted but actually encouraged for generations. 

To quote Milton Friedman, “Governments never learn. Only people learn.” If those elected are not held accountable that the commitments they make to us are based on a specific plan, then we as an electorate have only ourselves to blame when officials show no real progress on those commitments.

The status quo simply cannot continue. If it does, underserved communities are going to remain the perennial victims of the cycle of dependency, and the taxpayers are going to continue to fund programs that go nowhere. 

By incorporating intentionality, trust, collaboration, outcomes, and data collection as a practical framework, one can begin to build a strategy that will create better results for underserved communities.