Posted on 05/02/2002 8:13:52 AM PDT by finnman69
Daschle Corners His Own Party
By Terence P. Jeffrey
Thanks to Democratic Senate Leader Tom Daschle (D.-S.D.), November may bring an almost unprecedented moment to modern American politics: total Republican control of both elective branches of the federal government.
Since the early 1930s, when the ill-fated Herbert Hoover sat in the White House, Republicans have controlled the House, Senate and presidency simultaneously only twice. Both times it was briefly and precariously.
The 83rd Congress, elected with President Eisenhower in 1952, started with a 221-to-215 Republican majority in the House (with 1 Independent). The Senate started with a 48-to-47 Republican majority (with 1 Independent). But during the two-years of the 83rd, nine senators died. The Democrats temporarily enjoyed a two-seat majority, but, by prior agreement, the GOP retained the leadership. It was to little avail: In the 1954 elections, the Democrats won back the majority.
From President Bush’s inauguration on January 20 of last year, until June 5, when Sen. James Jeffords of Vermont officially defected to the Democrats, the Republicans again controlled the presidency and both houses of Congress. In that short, sweet period, Congress enacted one significant piece of conservative legislation: the Bush tax cut.
Taking over the Senate leadership, Daschle promised a "spirit of bipartisanship" and warned that "polarized positions are an indulgence . . . the Senate cannot afford and our nation will not tolerate."
Yeah, right.
Except for a short respite following September 11, Daschle has been relentlessly partisan and polarizing. He has blocked every initiative supported by both the White House and the House Republican majority. The only major legislation he has let pass was a campaign finance reform law opposed by most House and Senate Republicans.
Prepare for the blowback. Daschle’s dog-in-the-manager strategy has returned to Republicans the same two clubs they used to beat up Democrats and take the majority in the 1994 mid-term elections: a nationalized agenda of issues that motivates both the GOP base and some swing voters, and a national liberal bogey man to pin up as poster boy of the enemy forces.
In 1994, the Contract for America served as the agenda; Bill Clinton played the poster boy. In 2002, Daschle will play poster boy; and the agenda will be a short list of hot items Daschle has obstructed in the Senate while pandering to the left wing.
Bush clearly understands the opportunity Daschle has handed him. Air Force One briefly touched down in Daschle’s home state of South Dakota last Wednesday. Before his plane took off again, Bush had raised a state record $350,000 for Rep. John Thune (R.-S.D.). In November, Thune will defeat Democratic Sen. Tim Johnson (D-S.D.). All else being equal, that alone will return the Senate to Republican control.
Back in Washington, Bush has maneuvered the GOP into position to carry on a sharp fall debate with the Democrats on issues on which popular opinion tilts in the Republican direction.
At Bush’s urging, the House voted two weeks ago to make last year’s tax cut permanent, reversing a provision that would terminate the cuts in 2011. Daschle vows he will not allow the Senate to vote on the measure. That sets up a straightforward referendum: Pick the Republican and cut taxes, pick the Democrat and increase taxes.
Daschle led Senate Democrats last week in a vote to prevent oil drilling in a tiny portion of the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. Major labor unions favor drilling. So does anyone who ponders the oil shortages, price spikes and unemployment that will follow if conflict in the Middle East inspires a new Arab oil embargo.
Greenpeace and the Sierra Club may have cheered Daschle’s blockade of Alaska, but Middle America didn’t. It sets up another straightforward referendum: Pick the Republican and create jobs at home while keeping gas prices low, pick the Democrat and create jobs in Iraq while driving gas prices higher. Daschle’s intransigence also helps the GOP attack the Democrats on their most vulnerable issue: national security.
Daschle is still stalling the Brownback-Landrieu bill to ban all human cloning. The bill passed the House by more than 100 votes. The Senate Democratic co-sponsor, Mary Landrieu of heavily Catholic and evangelical Christian Louisiana, endorsed the bill so fast in her home-state press that its Republican sponsors didn’t even get a chance to talk to her beforehand. Landrieu is a liberal, but she is no fool. Daschle is both. When Bush "wholeheartedly" endorsed Brownback-Landrieu, the pro-clone Daschle responded: "I think the American people are on our side on this issue." But some Senate Democrats aren’t even sure they are on Daschle’s side.
Another straightforward referendum: Pick the Republican and stop human cloning, pick the Democrat and get the Boys From Brazil.
And Daschle has stopped confirmation proceedings for almost all Bush nominees to the appellate courts. On May 9, Harvard-educated Honduran immigrant Miguel Estrada will celebrate one full year of waiting for a hearing—because Daschle fears he may not be a liberal activist in the mold of Ruth Bader Ginsburg or Stephen Breyer.
Another straight-forward referendum: Pick the Republican and get judges who won’t make law from the bench, pick the Democrat and get judges who think child pornography is free speech but the Ten Commandments are not.
Conservatives should cheer up. If they work hard this fall, next spring they will enjoy a political leverage they have not seen since the days of Calvin Coolidge.
Look at recent history, then. In '98 the party in power gained seats (unfortunately). Redistricting slightly favors the Pubbies, fundraising most assuredly does, and the polls look favorable (though we're still six months out).
On the contrary, dear, groups like Planned Parenthood and NOW that advocate baby killing are very concerned about the issue and are lobbying hard to stall conservative judges that will ban partial birth abortions and/or overturn Roe v. Wade on the grounds that it is unconstitutional.
Ouch.
So far I've seen no evidence that the RNC is preparing to run an aggressive national campaign this fall, or that GWB is going to expend some of his political capital. It's still early, but these issues won't matter if they're not placed in front of the electorate. If R's run on local issues, and selective national issues locally, there's no reason this won't be a typical mid term election.
Kick these states out of the Union. Since that isn't going to happen, nothing!
Let's point the firing squad in the right direction. The RNC will be exactly as aggressive as President Bush tells it to be. The RNC took a lot of unfair heat for the '92 and '96 campaigns. The fact is, in those years the RNC was full of blood-on-the-floor partisans who were in despair at the unwillingness of Bush and Dole to attack (not to mention their inability to speak the language). The candidate, and now the President, controls the campaign. As he should. Don't blame the spearcarriers; it's OUR job to nominate the right candidate.
That is why I give my money to people who do run aggressive campigns, like the NRA and the Club For Growth (who is running commercials slamming the 'Hole in his home state).
Not if I have any say in it....primaries....
Apparently not, since the GOP has held the House since '94.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.