Here’s how the New York Times characterized their exclusive interview with Hutchinson:
The state’s Republican governor, who recently vetoed an anti-transgender bill only to be overridden by the legislature, spoke to The Times about why his party has “got to show greater compassion.”
…
Gov. Asa Hutchinson, a Republican, opposed the bill, after supporting other laws limiting transgender rights. He has been making the case that the legislation not only violates conservative principles but could also hurt Republicans politically.
…
We spoke to the governor about the new law, his belief that Republicans are too enmeshed in the culture wars and whether the party has strayed from fundamental conservative values. The interview has been lightly edited. [New York Times]
…
Gov. Asa Hutchinson, a Republican, opposed the bill, after supporting other laws limiting transgender rights. He has been making the case that the legislation not only violates conservative principles but could also hurt Republicans politically.
…
We spoke to the governor about the new law, his belief that Republicans are too enmeshed in the culture wars and whether the party has strayed from fundamental conservative values. The interview has been lightly edited. [New York Times]
Here are some choice excerpts of what Hutchinson said to the Times:
But when I saw this third bill come forward, I thought it went too far. And I said: “We’ve got to show greater tolerance. We’ve got to show greater compassion.” And so I didn’t sign that.
…
[W]hen you look at conservatism, historically, you’ve had the Ronald Reagan coalition of defense conservatives, economic conservatives and social conservatives, and all three of those have formed the base of the Republican Party. There’s some tension between the different elements of that base. And we’ve been able to manage that very well over the course of the last four decades.
But you see, today the cultural war part of conservatism has overshadowed in many instances, and we haven’t struck the right balance with the economic conservatism and the restraint of government.
…
[W]hat’s important here, the risk for the party, is that particularly millennials, young people, they want to see more tolerance. They do not believe in judging someone else and making laws that make their lives more difficult. And so while the transgender community is very small, there’s a larger group that does not like the government picking on them. And that’s where we lose in the broader population — reflecting intolerance and reflecting a lack of diversity. [NYT]
If you’re going to be a broad-based party, you have to be true to your principles. And it starts with a restraint on government action.
Absolutely disgraceful. Governor Asa Hutchinson has completely undermined conservatives and common-sense Americans everywhere by agreeing to an interview with the fake New York Times to help them set their radical, anti-child, anti-morality transsexual agenda.
Hutchinson lamely appeals to the conservative principle of “limited government” as his rationale for defending the chemical castration of children.
The bill is overbroad, it’s extreme and, very importantly, it does not grandfather in those young people who are currently under hormone treatment, which means that those in Arkansas who are undergoing, under the doctor’s care and parents’ care, hormonal treatment — that would be withdrawn in the middle of that.
…
But you see, today the cultural war part of conservatism has overshadowed in many instances, and we haven’t struck the right balance with the economic conservatism and the restraint of government.
And that’s how I’ve made the case on this issue, is that as we do this analysis and as we support our social conservatives and we fight for these issues, we still have to ask the question, is this a proper role of government? Is this something that should be managed through families and churches and where they impact the culture or are we going to fight every battle by the state trying to change the culture or preserve the culture?
That’s a question we’re not asking enough. And that’s where I’d like to see a greater level of debate, a greater level of restraint, and not just simply saying we can solve every problem in society by passing a law. That’s not conservatism. I want us to refocus on that. [NYT]
…
But you see, today the cultural war part of conservatism has overshadowed in many instances, and we haven’t struck the right balance with the economic conservatism and the restraint of government.
And that’s how I’ve made the case on this issue, is that as we do this analysis and as we support our social conservatives and we fight for these issues, we still have to ask the question, is this a proper role of government? Is this something that should be managed through families and churches and where they impact the culture or are we going to fight every battle by the state trying to change the culture or preserve the culture?
That’s a question we’re not asking enough. And that’s where I’d like to see a greater level of debate, a greater level of restraint, and not just simply saying we can solve every problem in society by passing a law. That’s not conservatism. I want us to refocus on that. [NYT]
See also Hutchinson’s recent interview on ABC News for more of his mewling rhetoric about limited government.
