Leading the Minority into the Majority - Time for change in the House Republican leadership.

National Review Online ^ | November 15, 2006 | John Shadegg

[neverdem]

November 15, 2006, 8:00 a.m.

Leading the Minority into the Majority
Time for change in the House Republican leadership.

By John Shadegg

For months, voices inside and outside Washington had been warning Republicans in Congress to break away from our recent past or we would lose our majority. Last January when I was running for Majority Leader, I heard from long-time supporters that we had drifted away from our principles, particularly in the areas of fiscal responsibility and our promise to change the way Washington works. The drift had gone on for too long and the American people had finally had enough.

We made great strides in our early years in the majority — welfare reform, the first balanced budget in nearly 30 years, and a commitment to smaller government. Since then, we have more to be proud of — tax relief, a strong economy, and no terrorist attack on American soil in five years. But these accomplishments are not enough. We lost the people’s trust.

Now, we as Republicans are faced with a challenge. We must regain the trust of the American people or face being a minority party for a long time. We can regain their trust, but we must return to the ideals that swept us into the majority 12 years ago. The status quo is unacceptable. We heard voters’ message loud and clear. They want change in Washington and that means new leadership and a renewed and shared vision.

When we seized the majority, Republicans promised to deliver on two things; shrink the size and scope of the federal government and remove the ethical cloud over Washington by changing the way it operates. Initially, we made progress, enacted real reforms, and instilled fiscal discipline. In the years since, we have too often forgotten those promises.

Unfortunately, over time, things changed. Federal spending and government expansion increased at an alarming rate. More importantly, we became the party of secret backroom dealing that was sadly reminiscent of the scandal-plagued Democrat Congress we once railed against.

What happened to our promises? Huge government entitlements threaten to bankrupt the federal budget, earmarks exploded and often appeared corrupt and self-serving even if they weren’t, and the budget process has not been reformed. Still, some Republicans were surprised when some of the American people gave up on us and dealt us a decisive blow that quite frankly, could have been much worse.

Yet, in defeat there is a real opportunity for Republicans. We now have an opportunity to evaluate, unite, and change course. We must learn from the mistakes of the Democrats after their loss in 1994, and not spend the next 12 years in the minority. They kept the same leaders and not until they made the necessary changes eight years later did they begin to find a road toward success. If we want to return to the majority soon, we must take corrective action now. We cannot, as they did, count on the others side to make mistakes.

To be successful, our leaders must believe in the principles they are espousing. Paying lip service to reform and principle won’t be enough. The voters saw through it last week and they’ll see though it again. We need new ideas, a shared vision for real reform, and strong, principled, policy positions.

Being a part of the Revolutionary Class of ’94 instilled a sense of optimism and hope in me that still remains. We believed then that we could return our government to the people, and I still believe it now. The American people share the Republican vision for America, but now we must earn back their trust.

We need leaders with new ideas and new energy to reignite our efforts and reclaim our rightful place as the governing party of reform and individual empowerment. These principles will be the keys to our success. We will not regain the majority without them.

— Congressman John Shadegg is a candidate for minority whip in the House of Representatives. He is a Republican from Phoenix.

[neverdem]

Nov. 15, 2006: Boehner v. Pence DAVID FRUM'S DIARY

I recognize that sentiment at NRO is running pretty strongly in favor of Mike Pence in the race to fill the House GOP's minority leader post. Conservative readers tend to prefer Pence's more assertive ideology to the go-along-get-along practices of Boehner. They also feel that Pence's idealism and seeming guilelessness are the medicine required by a party that lost its majority in large part because voters perceived it as tainted by cynicism and corruption. Good arguments both.

And yet I am not persuaded. In the American congressional system, a minority party can exercise considerable power - if it maintains its unity and acts by careful plan. The minority leader's role resembles that of the coach of a weaker team or the general of a retreating army: it requires enormous discipline and skill to choose one's moments, target the opponents' weaknesses, avoid battle at the wrong time, seize opportunity at the right time. A majority leader can rely on brute weight of numbers; a minority leader must be nimble, shrewd, and alert to unpleasant realities.

That's why I find Mike Pence's past support for the so-called Pence immigration compromise so troubling. It's not that I demand perfect ideological orthodoxy from would-be leaders - far from it. But looking back on that strange episode I worry about something else: Pence got suckered.

Do I believe that the Pence plan was Pence's own handiwork? I do not. Somebody else devised it - and then persuaded Pence to adopt it as his own. Which would have been fine, if it really had been a compromise. But it wasn't. The Pence plan put a complicated unworkable conservative-sounding wrapping on the Senate/Bush plan. If the Pence plan had been adopted, that wrapping would very quickly have been shredded and the concealed object inside - amnesty plus guestworkers - would almost at once have emerged.

It worries me that Pence could be used in this way, contrary to his own principles and his party's interests. In what other ways might he again be manipulated and deceived? I agree wholeheartedly with him that the defeated Republican party needs to rediscover its principles. It also, in my opinion, needs to position itself to discredit its opponents swiftly and return to power before the glue of incumbency seals their Democratic opponents into their newly won seats. That task will require considerably more guile, forethought, and (yes) cunning than Pence showed in the immigration debate.

I am very alive to Boehner's imperfections too. But I am wondering whether this wounded party does not need a skilled if cynical doctor rather more than it needs an ardent but naive faith-healer.

PS - Mickey Kaus suggests that Pence was not a victim of the con, but a perpetrator of it. I almost wish I could believe that. But I don't.

[marlon]

I agree with Congressmen Shadegg but unfortunately electing Lott to a leadership position in the Senate shows that as usual the party leaders are not listening.

[Darkwolf377]

Pence wasn't suckered into anything. He merely realizes what so many here refuse to see: We are never, ever going to round up and ship out all the illegals in this country, and amnesty and guest worker bills are all that's ever going to be done.

I do not SUPPORT this idea (which won't stop two dozen freepers from claiming I do, but I couldn't care less), but I simply acknowledge reality. We will never, ever see US troops rounding up 12-20 million illegals and sending them home. Never.

Those here legally are the ones getting screwed, but that's the way it goes. The MOST we can hope for is enforcing the border and pouring more money into tracking down illegals who are already here.

The Tancredo fantasies are just that. Pence simply lives in the real world, which some around here see as evil.

[9999lakes]

Frankly this is too deep for me.

I don't know which of the two would be better.

On the other hand I DO know how to watch for reuslts, and i DO know how to judge them.

Let the republicans set up whoever they wish, and they we'll see if they are worth our support.

What we're done with, is blind support.

Do Something. And it better be something i Like!
Or we'll get someone else.

And Do it Quick, cause i'm tired of waiting.

[9999lakes]

hold it.

Lott is back!?

please inform me.
Are these republicans absolutely nuts?

[Seruzawa]

Yeah, it's time to rearrange the deck chairs.

[woodbutcher]

Right.

There is no such thing as rape, so lie down and enjoy it.

Thank God Winston Churchil did not have your great courage.

You must be French.

[Darkwolf377]

Right. There is no such thing as rape, so lie down and enjoy it. Thank God Winston Churchil did not have your great courage. You must be French.

Completely avoid the actual issue and simply make childish (and old) personal slams.

You must be a Liberal.

[9999lakes]

Please inform me. I do not yet know how Trent Lott is back in GOP leadership.

Tell me it ain't so.

[9999lakes]

And if it is...


Then they're assholes,
and dead to me.

[woodbutcher]

Not really.

Because the point is that one does not solve major problems by reaching the immediate conclusion that the problem has no solution.

Or that there is not really a problem after all.

We can't catch all of the shop lifters, so we should give them amnesty.

We can't catch all of the dope peddlers, we just are not going to put that many in the klink, so give them amnesty.

All foolish statements to make the point that your statement is no more sensible.

No, they can't all be rounded up on the same Friday afternoon and sent back.

But first you lock down the border. Then you stop an illegal for drunk driving, you send him back. One at a time, five at a time and you make a dent.

Then you really hang one on the employers of illegals. No job, they go home.

You don't send them, they just go.

As for the employers, treat them as rough as the IRS would. That makes an example of a few and the others will not take the risk.

It is really easy. The problem is that we have people in government wanting the Hispanic vote and people in industry that want cheap labor.

We don't even need new laws, just the will to enforce what we have now. But if you are running for office, the best thing you can do is proclaim loudly "There ought to be a law".

[Always Right]

Pense's plan for illegal immigrants is going to be far better than the one Pelosi puts on the President's desk.

[Darkwolf377]

Not really. Because the point is that one does not solve major problems by reaching the immediate conclusion that the problem has no solution. Or that there is not really a problem after all. We can't catch all of the shop lifters, so we should give them amnesty. We can't catch all of the dope peddlers, we just are not going to put that many in the klink, so give them amnesty. All foolish statements to make the point that your statement is no more sensible.

You have miusunderstood my very clear statement 100%.

[airborne]

The Republican Party is broken.

I'm beginning to wonder if it's possible to fix.

[woodbutcher]

"but I simply acknowledge reality. We will never, ever see US troops rounding up 12-20 million illegals and sending them home. Never.

Those here legally are the ones getting screwed, but that's the way it goes. The MOST we can hope for is enforcing the border and pouring more money into tracking down illegals who are already here.

The Tancredo fantasies are just that. Pence simply lives in the real world, which some around here see as evil."

I am sorry and apologize for misinterpreting the above to mean that we can not send the 12 million back. That we are, therefore stuck with them.

Would you please explain to me what the above quote from your post really means?

[WOSG]

Shadegg and Pence would both be great.

It looks like Boehner is new enough (since January) that he can stay, but at least get Shadegg to replace Blunt.

As for Trent Lott, people forget, he was railroaded out of his majority post over a 'macaca moment' type comment for an old geezer. I'd like to see more of Kyl, Coburn and Sessions, but Lott is a good whip, he did the job in the House many years ago. I dont understand the complaints about him. We thought he wasnt that good as majority leader, but he managed to screw fewer things up than Frist, so there ya go.

We have had some real dynamic take-no-prisoners policians on our side ... but curiously the media wounds or destroys them. (Newt, Delay, Santorum, etc.)
They let the GOP keep the Lamar! types.

[WOSG]

"I'm beginning to wonder if it's possible to fix."

Getting Shadegg in there would be a first step.

[BoBToMatoE]

I think Pence is a good guy for the job - but I am sorry, Shadegg wont be able to get the job done.

[woodbutcher]

"Shadegg wont be able to get the job done."

---

Why not? Not to argue the point, but to get an understanding.

[Mamzelle]

re: It is really easy. The problem is that we have people in government wanting the Hispanic vote and people in industry that want cheap labor.)))

And a lot of Republican wives who won't stoop to clean their own homes--or won't pay an honest wage to get the job done--or like playing Scarlett O'Hara to subservient illegal help.

Politicians forget that conservative women are not exactly like conservative men. Housework, and who does it, is a charged issue.

Who cleans the bathroom in these Republicanista couples? It's a hot political question, but no one asks it.

If the Minutemen really wanted some political ammo, they'd start sending around a private investigator to see who cleans the houses of these elites. Once a few pro-open borders get embarrassed in public with their semi-slave labor, and we might have a little momentum.

There's a lot of arrogant paternalism in the pro-open borders debate. It could be used against them.