For the GOP, a Warning
by
Vincent Fiore
These days,
it's hard to tell just who the majority party in Washington really is.
But according to the last several national elections, Republicans have won
the House, the Senate, and the presidency. As Bush begins his second term
with increased majorities in both House and Senate chambers, it
seems that the more power Republicans garner via the voters, the less
resolve and political courage they display.
If you believe you sense the beginnings of a commentary that may be less
than complimentary to the GOP, trust your instincts--you are right. This
space is usually filled with anything but hyperventilating rants, as I
leave the more exercised and vituperative prose for the posses of the
Bush-hating left.
But even dormant volcanoes erupt once in a great while, and normally
ground-in-fact writers can otherwise show the occasional adverse effects
of frustration.
As Hillary Rodham Clinton continues to move ever-so-stealthily to the
right on most every issue that is of consequence, Republicans cannot seem
to find their proper voice on nearly anything.
Not just Hillary--though she stands out for the obvious reason of her
future presidential run in 2008--but the entire Democratic Party. Like
Hillary, the Democratic Party has acted like something they're not, and
that is the majority party in Washington.
Sure, Democrats cannot muster the votes to pass their own legislation, but
they do a more than credible job on blocking President Bush's agenda.
Some of the success of Democrats can be chalked up to incidental events,
like the always-helpful op-ed pages of the mainstream media, along with
high gasoline prices and low stock market performances.
But the primary reason for the Democratic Party's success to date is its
ability to adhere to partisan discipline and unity, and the GOP's
unwillingness to engage them as a majority party.
Early successes aside, like the class action tort reform bill and the more
recent Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2005, the Republican-led Congress has had
one oar in the water most of the time.
From the alleged wrong-doing of House majority leader Tom Delay, to the
botched job of touting Social Security reform, to the breathtaking lack of
clamorous support for United Nations nominee John Bolton, Republicans--as
a party--have not done nearly enough to refute liberal propaganda and
obstructionists actions.
Republicans in Congress have done a wretched job at protecting and
supporting the president with regard to Social Security reform. Senate
members have been capricious in their support and strategy in changing
Senate rules in answer to the Democrats' unprecedented filibustering of
ten Bush nominees to the Circuit Courts.
Equally at fault in this widening gap of leadership is President Bush
himself. Though the vast majority of Americans want illegal immigration
stopped--even to the extent of closing the borders--Bush has developed a
political tin-ear on the issue. Democratic Senators Hillary Clinton and
Barbara Boxer are now outflanking him by calling for tougher border
protection.
I can think of no worse a party-dividing issue and majority-killer as that
of America's immigration policy, and President Bush's widely perceived
"back-door amnesty" for some 11 million illegal aliens in the country
today. Discussions on immigration today are akin to discussions on Social
Security 20 years ago: Say the wrong thing, and you may experience the
fatal effects of the new "third rail" of politics.
Basically though, there is the expectation of "To the victor go the
spoils" that most people are fuming over. Republicans have not had this
firm a grip on Washington for over 75 years. The country has gone through
a mini-realignment of sorts since the GOP captured the House in 1994. The
electorate is decidedly more traditional and conservative in its social
demeanor.
So it is hard to come to grips with the fact that the Republican
Party--from the president on down--has behaved like a majority-in-denial,
content to be acknowledged as the premiere power in Washington, but
lacking the iron-will and killer instinct of latter-day Democratic
majorities that dominated the American political scene for decades.
What do Republicans in Washington say to the millions who volunteered for
the Bush/Cheney 2004 election, giving up their days and nights to go
door-to-door and make tens of millions of "get to the polls" phone calls,
while donating unprecedented millions to the campaign?
Would they say "Well, we tried, but we were cowed into submission by the
op-ed pages of the New York Times and the Washington post"?
Or would they say that the opposition was "Just too tough to overcome, so
we decided to moderate our views instead of fighting upon the mandate
given us by the voters"?
Republican political palsy and its effect on the party rank and file are
as yet unknown. While some are monolithic in their support for a
Republican majority in government, others are becoming increasingly
alienated with the party's lack of backbone and its political dithering on
core issues. By the 2006 midterm elections, things will be clearer, and
Republicans may regret their inactions upon these very core issues.
Last November, 122 million people voted, or 60.7% of the voting-age
public. That is the highest percentage since 1968. Out of this, some 62
million-plus voted for a Republican president, and increased his
majorities in both houses of Congress to work with.
If Republicans do not set their sights on what these millions of voters
sent them there to do, they will feel the beginnings of their wrath in
2006, and experience the full measure of it in 2008. A warning to the
majority party in Washington: Put up or get put out.
