Barone, RCP:
Yes, the Pledge does include some procedural reforms (any House member can get a vote on an amendment cutting spending), as did the Contract (cutting the number of committees and committee staff).
But the Pledge to America also addresses two central economic issues and makes commitments that will embarrass House Republicans if they gain a majority but fail to deliver.
One is to roll back non-defense discretionary spending to 2008 levels. The other is to repeal — not revise or amend or embroider, but repeal — the health care bill signed by Barack Obama exactly six months before the shirt-sleeved House Republicans made their pledge.
[…]
Today, we are in, if not an official recession, at least an agonizingly slow recovery. And if Democrats complain that it’s unfair for government and public employees to be limited to what they got in 2008, Republicans can reply that an awful lot of their constituents would be very happy to go back to the income levels and the housing equity and the 401(k) balances they had in 2008.
Everyone has been suffering. Why should government be exempt? Wouldn’t it function better if it went on a diet?
As for Obamacare, a few months ago Republican leaders were reluctant to call for repeal. They may have feared that Nancy Pelosi and Bill Clinton were right when they predicted the legislation would become more popular when passed. Or they may have been wary of sounding extreme.
But now they’re squarely for repeal. It turns out to be a stand most Republican primary voters demand and most general election voters support.
Gingrich’s Contract Republicans did not have such a target 16 years ago. Hillycare had already fizzled weeks before they assembled on the Capitol steps. Today, the demand for major reversals in public policy is much greater than it was back then.
One other thing is different. In 1994, Gingrich’s Republicans were not sure they would win a majority; conventional wisdom around Washington was they would not.
Today, chances for a Republican House majority seem excellent, if not absolutely certain. But no one knows how big a majority.
Can Republicans really repeal Obamacare and roll back spending to 2008 levels? Probably not. But by taking clear stands, they raise their chances of getting part way there by 2012. And maybe farther later.
Barone seems to think (and perhaps he’s correct) that the Pledge is good politics. And while many conservatives / classical liberals wish that it had gone further (or taken more extreme stands on, eg., cutting spending), it is at least a start — a minor walk back from the trough, but a walk back nevertheless.
Disappointing, of course, that nowhere in the Pledge do Republicans take a stand against earmarks — mostly because many GOP legislators wouldn’t sign something like that. Which suggests to me that we still have quite a long way to go.
First things first, though: get some good strong fiscal conservatives in office, and then build from there. If Americans can succeed in getting many of these Tea Party candidates elected, establishment politicians from both parties will be forced to move right in order to appear “moderate.”
Similarly, having a statement of legislative intentions — watered down though it may be — at least gives the GOP something solid to sell to voters, and something tangible for which voters can and will hold them accountable.
It’s a starting point. Better than nothing. Yes, we have to get rid of earmarks, but inch by inch.
I agree completely JeffG.
It’s a pretty good start, and not only provides a baseline of ideas for heretofore low information and uninvolved voters to consider, it also provides a chacklist for us to hold newly elected GOP legislators to their promises.
As you mentioned, it may serve to move the ideological middle ground further back to the right. And, in keeping with my usual pollyanish outlook, may provide an opening for the House to move forward on some of Paul Ryan’s “Roadmap” suggested reforms.
Although my intuition tels me that those broader reform ideas, like a simplified tax code, may end up being incorporated into the 2012 Presidential campaign battle.
It is to say they *want* the party of tea to hold them accountable… To keep pushing them.
That’s neat.
Some of them understand that we understand this is just a start, and if they fail to deliver more than this, they are out. However, I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt if they can pass good stuff in the house and have it beaten down by the Senate or the President, both of which will remain Democrat.
We need to change both the political culture of America and the political culture in Washington. The former will be more difficult than the latter, I think, because too many people are used to getting “free stuff.”
Disappointing, of course, that nowhere in the Pledge do Republicans take a stand against earmarks — mostly because many GOP legislators wouldn’t sign something like that. Which suggests to me that we still have quite a long way to go.
Of course there are more projects and issues that the GOP needs to tackle before anyone could say they have addressed our economic situation in a comprehensive manner but the pork issue is a demonstrably minor one.
Amount of pork projects in 2006 = about $60 billion
Dept of Education budget = $160 billion
TARP = $800 billion
If the GOP could guarantee cuts to most government programs and forbid any TARP/stimulus spending, I’d be more than happy to suffer $60 billion in pork.
You can’t eliminate corruption entirely; you can only restrict the size and scope of government and, therefore, the incentives that create greater corruption.
the pledge to America is fucking exciting!
I was expecting a list of ten items, 1 thru 10 of which being, “Repeal Obamacare, put in place actual reform.” It would have helped get the point across regarding how serious they are about it.
The problem isn’t pork per se; it’s that these little deals are used to buy compliance on the bigger deals. Get rid of that $60 billion, and all of a sudden you don’t have leverage with which to buy support for another trillion in spending.
A lot of stuff gets passed because a Congresscritter thinks “Sure, it’s bad policy and harmful to the country generally, but the $N million project in my district will offset that harm for my constituents.”
Make ’em vote on the merits of the bill at hand, and cut the legalized bribery out of the mix.
Which suggests to me that we still have quite a long way to go.
Got to start somewhere. The leftists had to start somewhere when they began their march through society, didn’t they? So start somewhere and start rolling things back. It will get easier as more things roll back and the disasters predicted by the leftists never materialize.
– O’bummblefucks 60 billion slush fund was simply to cram the union coffers with lots of cash just prior to the Nov. elections so at least they’d have that going for them.
“Why should government be exempt?”
– Even that’s a fallacy. They wouldn’t be “suffering”, just scoring less of a theft on the publics taxes. All union wages/retirement benefits (same with all gov. employee’s) should be immediately brought inline with comparable private sector levels. If that means zero, then that’s what they should get.
– This whole approach of pitting government employment against the private sector is just one more ploy to destroy the free market system.
– Congress is always making laws that benefits no one. Here’s a chance to pass a few that would truly benefit the majority of working Americans, and at the same time relieve bankrupted states.
Oh, when Congress makes law, you can bet someone benefits. Not us, probably, but someone.
The GOP’s 2010 theme song. Or, it oughtta be.
Better theme song for Nov ’02.
Regards,
Ric
Most likely GOP theme song.
I want the music of screams, moans, and lamentations.
Rick Lazio drops out, more or less good news for Paladino.
While Massachusetts claws its way back to something resembling political sanity, Maryland appears to want to take on Ma.’s old role. Workers of the Government World Unite to make your stand below the Mason-Dixon line!
carl p will break andy the cuomos neck
my friend came by the house the other day
we talk music and sports usually
but he knows im politics so he dont usually bring it up
but he was frothing at the mouth pissed
f’ng democrats/f them
i just stood back..
and did i say i told ya so?
nope..
i started singing the song i hate worst!
we got/ high hopes
we got/ high hopes..
high apple pie in the sky
hopes
just an anecdote/ but if people in mass are this pissed!
btw/i’m tea party/ volunteer for jeff perry/ ma 10th
and i emailed sean bialet but he wont ..frankly/ he might..
mr sandman/ lend me ur ear
No, this would be the ideal GOP campaign theme song.
What kind of fool do you think I am, Democrats?
hank williams sr.
why dont u love me like u used to do?
my hairs still curly and my eyes are all blue,,
why dont u love me like u used to do?
aint had no loving or a hugging or a dick
cheney in a long long while..
ding dong–
“mmm -trick or..
my car broke down- can i use ur phone?”
just cuz steve mcqueen shoved coffee grounds up his ass../ does that mean i hafta?
always a paul newman fan..
u got ur mind right/luke?
BOBBY QUARTRO!
From Geoffb’s first article link:
“First of all, if we win it is imperative that we capitalize on the panic and demoralization of the Democrats. We have to hit them again and again with things that will induce a “shock and awe” reaction. If you are familiar with military terminology, we have to lengthen their OODA loop so that they are reacting to us [and failing] and not the other way around.”
I like the cut of this fella’s jib. 2010 is the beginning of the wargaming phase of the conflict. Team R likely will not succeed in passing an agenda but they can take away the last defense the left cynically tries to employ, namely: that team R is merely the party of no. Lets see Odummy veto a tax cut when we experience a second recession coupled with double digit unemployment.