Sunday, May 07, 2006

GOP's Best Friend: Democratic Leaders

There has been a debate in Democratic circles whether Congressional Democrats maximize their November prospects by saying little about their policy ideas - thereby giving Republicans nothing to shoot at, or whether they need to offer an alternative to Republican governance. They have chosen to do the latter.

Confident Democrats Lay Out Agenda
Party Plans Probes Of Administration If It Wins the House
By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, May 7, 2006; A01

Democratic leaders, increasingly confident they will seize control of the House in November, are laying plans for a legislative blitz during their first week in power that would raise the minimum wage, roll back parts of the Republican prescription drug law, implement homeland security measures and reinstate lapsed budget deficit controls.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) said in an interview last week that a Democratic House would launch a series of investigations of the Bush administration, beginning with the White House's first-term energy task force and probably including the use of intelligence in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. Pelosi denied Republican allegations that a Democratic House would move quickly to impeach President Bush. But, she said of the planned investigations, "You never know where it leads to..."

Despite waves of redistricting that have solidified the positions of incumbents from both parties, Pelosi said 50 Republican seats are in play, while fewer than 10 Democratic seats face strong challenges. That figure of GOP seats is disputed by independent analysts, but even the most cautious estimates put more than 15 Republican seats in jeopardy.

Stuart Rothenberg, editor of the nonpartisan Rothenberg Political Report, said his most expansive estimate classifies 52 seats as "unsafe," 40 of them Republican, 12 of them Democratic. But, he said, only a tidal wave would dislodge the incumbent party from many of those seats, and more realistically, 30 Republican seats and five Democratic districts are vulnerable.

To counter that perception, House Democrats have formulated a plan of action for their first week in control. Their leaders said a Democratic House would quickly vote to raise the minimum wage for the first time since 1997. It would roll back a provision in the Republicans' Medicare prescription drug benefit that prohibits the Department of Health and Human Services from negotiating prices for drugs offered under the program.

It would vote to fully implement the recommendations of the bipartisan panel convened to shore up homeland security after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Democratic leaders said.

And it would reinstate lapsed rules that say any tax cuts or spending increases have to be offset by spending cuts or tax increases to prevent the federal deficit from growing.

Pelosi also vowed "to use the power to investigate" the administration on multiple fronts, starting with the task force convened in secret by Vice President Cheney to devise the administration's energy policy. The administration has successfully fought lawsuits since 2001 that sought to reveal the names of energy company executives tapped to advise the task force.

"Certainly the conduct of the war" in Iraq would be the subject of hearings, if not a full-fledged House investigation, Pelosi said. Another subject for investigation could be the use of intelligence on Saddam Hussein's alleged weapons of mass destruction to make the case for the 2003 invasion.


Hoyer added that he would like to see investigations into the extent of domestic wiretapping by the National Security Agency, and the billions of dollars wasted by contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Campaign chiefs for Republican Senate and House candidates have already begun using the threat of such investigations to raise money and rile core Republican voters. A recent mailing by Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R-N.C.), chairwoman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, warned that Democrats "will call for endless congressional investigations and possibly call for the impeachment of President Bush!"

I'm not sure this is a wise strategy for Dems. Stu Rothenberg has argued before that the midterms have already been nationalized - based on views of the President, the Iraq War, etc. There is some concern on the Democratic side that their base is not fully energized, and while this leftist litany may advance that goal, it probably helps Republicans more, comparatively. Liddy Dole has taken some criticism for the NRSC's recruiting, but Nancy Pelosi just handed her a lot of ammo for the fall campaign.

Plus, the Pelosi agenda obviously includes a fatal flaw - the investigations. Undecided voters are sick and tired of the partisanship of Washington, and the inability of Republicans and Democrats to work together. When the Republican Congress impeached President Clinton in 1998, it soured enough middle-of-the-road voters that they handed the GOP an almost unprecendented loss of House seats in the 6th year of a Presidency. To promise to unleash a raft of investigations, possibly leading to impeachment, may excite the base, but it is anathema to the undecideds. This will get huge play, and expect Democratic candidates to get lots and lots of questions about whether they agree with Pelosi that impeachment of the President may be warranted. For Democrats running in swing seats - trying to mollify the base while winning moderate votes - there is no good answer to this question. This is a very, very foolish move.

Further, the Democratic agenda gives the GOP opportune policy targets as well: the so-called 'pay-go' law, which prevents policy changes that increase the deficit, forces either spending cuts or tax increases. Which do you think the Democratic leadership of the House is more likely to favor?

And the move to set a national Democratic agenda will make it easier for Republicans to focus attention on the people who will ascend to positions of power in a Democratic Congress. I know moderate Democrats who are frightened at the prospect of seeing Nancy Pelosi, Henry Waxman, Charlie Rangel, and John Conyers setting the agenda for the House of Representatives. Expect more attention to be focused on the agendas that these Representatives would take up.

Hugh Hewitt says that the GOP has already turned the corner, and is headed for a strong November. I'm not sure of that, but the GOP has just got a big boost in its effort to maintain House control.

Update: Captain Ed's take on this is worth reading. He does a good job of looking at the policy side as well, which I didn't touch upon.

Back to the top.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Keep in mind that Pelosi would be second in succession (behind a guy with a bum ticker who hunts drunk).

If the prospect of Commander in Chief Pelosi doesn't get 'em to the polls, nothing will.

Anonymous said...

The Republicans need a wake up call, flipping the Congress over to the Dems will be just the ticket. Since most Republicans act like Dems, this won't be a big change for them.

Come the presidential election in 2008, the Republicans will recognize the importance of conservative values. Much like Bush 1's lose was a wake up call for Newt's Revolution. Its darkest before the dawn.

Anonymous said...

As an independent-minded liberal Democrat, I also question the impeachment strategy. Where are the politians who can rise above partisanship? Of either party! I used to think I could/would vote for McCain, but his embrace of the religious right gives me pause. I can hardly beleive that I am thinking (almost wistfully!?) of Nixon's 'Silent Majority' campaign.

Anonymous said...

Hey, what goes around comes around. Republicans are reaping what they sowed during the presidency of Bill Clinton. If conservatives think that they can get away with trying to impeach a president over a blow job then they are kidding themselves if they think that the Democrats will suffer for impeaching an incompetent moron for lying us into a war and then bungling it into a quagmire. Oh and by the way if they impeach Bush they will be impeaching Cheney at the same time. Happy days are here again!

John R.

Anonymous said...

John R,

It was called perjury. When are dems ever going to learn that we did not care what Clinton did in his private life. It does not matter what he lied under oath about - it matters that he lied under oath. If you or I had done that, we'd have gone to jail for five years.

Still, I want the impeachment talk to be played up. Please, John R, talk up impeachment. I beg you - please don't throw me in dat dar briar patch!

Eventually, dems will learn that 80% of the elctorate doesn't matter(the base on either side, although they must get to the polls), and politicians will always get at least 40% of the vote. It's the 20% in the middle that decide things.

Every time I think the Republicans are goners, people like John R come along and put us right back in power. I plan to laugh all the way to a larger majority.

h0mi said...

"Hey, what goes around comes around. Republicans are reaping what they sowed during the presidency of Bill Clinton."

And that worked so well for Republicans didn't it?