-
Recent Posts
- Kamala’s brother-in-law fleeced taxpayers for billions to give to left-wing groups and lawyers | New York Post | 8.24. 24
- Coming: Global Political Recalibration
- Clark Judge: FDR, Reagan, and European Nationalism | NatCon Rome 2020
- Lady Gaga Tells All
- Trial Lawyers Use COVID-19 to Prey on America’s Corporations | Real Clear Policy | 12.1.20
Categories
- Book Reviews (12)
- Communication Strategy (23)
- Constitution and Law (14)
- Economic Policy: General (33)
- Economic Policy: Health Care (30)
- Economic Policy: The Great Financial Crisis (15)
- Economic Policy: US Debt Crisis (32)
- Education Policy (1)
- Global Issues (57)
- Political Commentary: Campaign 2008 (18)
- Political Commentary: Campaign 2012 (43)
- Political Commentary: Campaign 2020 (5)
- Political Commentary: General (122)
- Politics & Policy (6)
- Ronald Reagan and the Reagan Administration (11)
- Speeches/Lectures (9)
- Uncategorized (6)
Archives
- September 2024
- March 2023
- July 2022
- April 2022
- December 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- November 2019
- December 2018
- September 2017
- April 2017
- January 2017
- October 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- June 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- January 2008
- June 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- June 2006
- October 2005
- August 2005
- March 2005
- November 2004
- August 2004
- June 2004
- December 2003
- October 2003
- August 2003
- April 2003
- July 2002
- December 2001
- November 2001
- May 2001
- December 2000
- June 2000
- January 1995
- August 1994
- August 1992
- June 1991
- July 1990
- September 1989
- July 1989
- March 1989
Tags
2012 2012 election Benghazi campaign constitution debt debt crisis Democrats economy election 2012 Energy Financial Times fiscal cliff foreign policy Gingrich Global Warming GOP Hoover Digest hughhewitt HughHewitt.com Immigration IRS National Review New York Post New York Times Obama Obamacare Republicans Ricochet Ricochet.com Romney Russia Scandal Senate SOTU speech Supreme Court Syria Tea Party Trump U.S. News Ukraine Wall Street Journal war Washington Times
Wanted: Political Leaders They Respect | HughHewitt.com | 12.20.10
It’s about time.
Last week saw a pair of pass-the-torch moments. The first was when Democrat majority leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi failed to jam through one last massive all-purpose spending bill. The second was when they couldn’t perform their planned exorcism of the Bush Administration’s growth-oriented tax policies and indeed got frozen out of tax negotiations between the White House and Senate Republicans. In those two events, it became clear that the sun had set on the worst congressional leadership in modern history.
The question now is, what will the new day look like? It may take more than one Congress to know for sure.
Congressional Republicans have clearly got the people’s message: Cut spending; reduce government. Yes, there was a lot of spending in the tax bill. It was the Administration’s price for going along. Some say the GOP should have walked away from the deal, trying again with the new Congress. But remember that the negotiations on the bill were between the president and Congressional Republicans. Congressional Democrats were not in the room. And the president will still be in the White House in January.
Perhaps with the new Congress the White House will show a flexibility that entirely escaped it prior to November’s election. But on big issues like repeal of the health overhaul, don’t bet too heavily on it.
It has probably not occurred to Hill or White House Democrats just yet, but socialistic health initiatives have been political poison pills for their party for more than three generations.
Harry Truman tried to enact such a bill in 1946. The GOP won back control of Congress in that year’s election. Lyndon Johnson pushed through Medicare after winning big Congressional majorities in 1964, and the Republicans made big gains in the 1966 midterms. Bill Clinton’s drive for Hillarycare was followed by election of the first GOP congress in 40 years in the 1994 midterms. Barack Obama’s Democrats are just the latest in a long line of liberals lured to the call of government health takeover only to run aground on the hidden rocks of popular resistance.
But here is the Democrats’ enduring advantage. Every ten to twenty years for the past seventy years, the voters have given them a big enough congressional margin to legislate to the limits of their imaginations. In modern times the GOP has never received that kind of mandate. Without a strong majority and a Republican in the White House, repeal of Obamacare is not in the cards. Neither is a radical overhaul.
The narrowness of past GOP congressional majorities has proven more debilitating to the GOP cut-government agenda than is generally appreciated. For example, some have criticized then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich for conceding so quickly to President Bill Clinton during the 1995 government shutdown showdown. But according to House insiders of the time, Gingrich probably could not have held his caucus behind him much longer than he did. More than twenty Republicans from marginal districts were starting to buckle under the pressure.
A more telling example is the run up in spending during the first six years of the Bush presidency. With the same unsteady majorities, the Bush team used spending to win key votes, particularly, so far as I could see, on war efforts and trade deals, matters dealing with vital national interests but for which GOP support was more conditional than most appreciated. On critical issues, spending was the administration’s glue for fastening a factious Congress to its policies.
The good news is that the glue may no longer hold. “May” is the key word. Compared to even a few months ago, it is now well understood and accepted that for a number of election cycles the swing vote in American politics has been looking for a political party that would cut government spending and get control of unfunded entitlements. The big question in Washington now is will that same swing vote tolerate cuts to all forms of spending, including programs that benefit those very voters?
Some polling suggests that the answer is yes. I myself suspect that a majority of American voters are not looking for political leaders they like so much as ones they respect. And they will only respect those with the courage to walk into what has long been seen as the valley of the shadow of political death — spending cuts and entitlement reform – and to keep walking.
So the incoming Congress will be stage one, if there is to be a financial turnaround of the U.S. government. With any luck, the GOP will do sufficiently well to receive a green light from voters in 2012.
If so, that is when the true reforms will truly begin.