Handmade, bespoke suits are pricey. According to press reports, former French Prime Minister Francois Fillon, the Republican Party’s candidate in this month’s first-round French presidential election, purchased two suits this winter for 13,000 Euros. He didn’t pay for them; a billionaire friend reportedly picked up the tab.
There’s nothing illegal when a wealthy friend bankrolls your personal tastes, especially when you are a private citizen and can legally accept such gifts. The bespoke affair contained two little problems, however. Fillon’s presidential campaign espoused greater French austerity (budget cuts, civil-service reductions etc.) plus a commitment to openness and transparency in government.
“Suitgate” followed January 2017 revelations that Fillon put his wife and two children on the payroll of the French parliament. French members of parliament can legally put family members on the payroll. The rub is that Fillon’s family members allegedly performed very little, if any, work and received some 800,000 Euros from French taxpayers. With French unemployment near 10 percent and youth unemployment near 25 percent, it’s hard to justify public money for nothing.
Fillon’s wife also allegedly received compensation for editorial services at an old-line, prestigious publication called “La Revue des Deux Mondes.” News stories suggest that Ms. Fillon did little work for the journal, which is owned by one of the former prime minister’s wealthy friends. Ms. Fillon’s make-work assignment at the journal was allegedly a “quid pro quo” for her husband’s efforts to obtain for his patron a notch up in his already existing recognition as a member of France’s elite “legion d’honneur” (perhaps better called “legion donor”).
Perks and perquisites seem to be a recurring theme for Fillon. When he previously served as prime minister under president Nicholas Sarkozy, Fillon reportedly liked to fly home on weekends on the French equivalent of Air Force One. A far-less-expensive alternative was available: a roughly one-hour ride from Paris on France’s public rapid train, the TGV. Fillon is no Joe Biden who, as a United States Senator, commuted daily on Amtrak’s Acela between Washington and his Wilmington, Delaware, residence.
When the presidential race began, Fillon was my personal favorite. I thought he had experience, integrity, gravitas, and sound policy ideas for reforming a hidebound France. Unfortunately, he risks becoming France’s Hillary Clinton: a former frontrunner who blew a big lead. Fillon stunned the French political world last fall by winning the Republican primary and then held a commanding lead until the January scandals broke. Recent polling suggests he is likely to place third on April 23.
If Fillon finishes third, then the May 7 final round will pit Marine Le Pen, the right-wing leader of the National Front (formerly known for being be both fascist and anti-semitic, thanks to its founder, Jean-Marie Le Pen, Marine’s father) against Emmanuel Macron, a former Rothschild banker turned Socialist Party adviser and economy minister under the current French President, Francois Hollande.
The two establishment French political parties – the Socialists and the Republicans (the latest incarnation of what is essentially the former Gaullist party) -- are, for the first time in the Fifth Republic’s history, likely to be denied the presidency. Incumbent Hollande has distinguished himself with popular approval ratings as low as 4 percent. For some perspective: even at Watergate’s nadir, Richard Nixon’s approval numbers remained above 20 percent.
Hollande saw the graffiti on the wall and announced last December that he would not seek a second term. The Socialists then marched off a cliff and nominated an even more left-wing candidate, Benoit Hamon, whose policies (earlier retirement, a guaranteed income for all French people) constitute political and economic lunacy given France’s current fiscal challenges.
Le Pen’s National Front party is well known, but it still carries high negatives. Moreover, it has enjoyed relatively few electoral successes in terms of National Assembly representatives and regional or local political offices. Nonetheless, French voters show increasing hostility toward governing elites, skepticism about globalization, and outright fear when it comes to radical Islam, home-grown terrorists, and the government’s capacity to keep them safe. Many French citizens may find a xenophobic nationalist like Le Pen more appealing than the traditional French leaders groomed through France’s system of elite universities. These days, French elites have little credibility.
Emmanuel Macron’s party – En Marche! (e.g., “Onwards!”) – by contrast, is essentially nonexistent. He only launched his movement last summer, and there are no En Marche! elected officials (yet), even though En Marche! will field candidates for National Assembly seats. Macron hopes to attract center-left Socialists who are fed up with extreme-left, impracticable proposals and center-right Republicans who fear a Le Pen victory, or who find Fillon a hypocrite and/or too socially conservative. Current polling suggests that Macron will finish second on April 23 and would win a second-round runoff against Le Pen with nearly 60 percent of the popular vote.
But last year’s UK Brexit vote and Donald Trump’s upset suggest that nothing should be taken for granted in the 2017 French presidential election. Whoever finishes second on April 23 will likely be France’s next president, but it is also plausible that Le Pen could still eke out a victory if the anti-National Front vote splinters or abstains. We now know that opinion polls can be dramatically wrong.
A Le Pen victory would be a disaster for France. She is anti-globalization, anti-Europe, pro-Vladimir Putin, and pledges social and economic policies that France cannot afford. A Fillon victory would mean a weakened president whose credibility and integrity were in question, although if he enjoyed a parliamentary majority, some of his proposed reforms might squeak through.
A Macron victory would bring considerable enthusiasm plus uncertainty about his ability to govern. Macron is only 39-years-old and has never been elected to office. While he is pro-Europe and promises much-needed labor-market reforms, he has been criticized for advancing relatively uncertain policy ideas both in his 265-page campaign manifesto, “Revolution,” and on the stump. In “Revolution,” he acknowledges that he is very definitely a product of France’s meritocratic system, but he adds that he has never adhered to France’s traditional political system (pp. 243-44). He says, somewhat vaguely, that, if elected, his program will be accomplished together with the French people.
Friends of Macron, including one close economics adviser, tell me that he’s super-smart and super-nice. There is no doubt that when it comes to age, style, experience, temperament, and dynamism, Macron promises to be a different kind of leader. If he wins on May 7, he is unlikely to have a parliamentary majority, which will mean another period of “cohabitation” with a prime minister from another political party.
There’s also an internal dualism that Macron must resolve: he worked as a Rothschild investment banker and for Francois Hollande’s Socialist party and government. In which direction will he turn if elected? France does not need a “gauche caviar” leader.
At issue is whether any of these three candidates can lead a fractured country and an uncertain government. Reforms have been promised before – from left and right – but nothing seems to change in France. Other European nations – Germany, most notably – implemented tough reforms that the French only talk about. Today, the German economy is Europe’s strongest.
French voters must ask whether they have had enough talk and really desire change. Other, more dynamic countries are attracting France’s most talented young people. This year’s election is critical for a country that keeps talking reform while avoiding tough choices. Let’s see if this time France is serious about its future.
Charles Kolb served as Deputy Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy from 1990-1992 in the George H. W. Bush White House. He was president of the French-American Foundation – United States from 2012-2014 and president of the Committee for Economic Development from 1997-2012.