"Back
to the Future: Hastert Tries to Return House to Michel Era," bannered
the headline in the current issue of Roll Call.
Forget that the Republicans were in the minority then, although it was
more civil. Speaker Dennis Hastert actually said he had his "own idea
of how Congress should work," but he may have subliminally looked back
to the good old days of the minority-civility mindset under former GOP
Leader Bob Michel-because he twice slipped and called the Democratic
Minority Leader, "Speaker Gephardt."
Nest it was Mr. Hastert on Fox News Sunday, belaying the early belief
that he learned from Newt Gingrich’s overexposure and was laying low.
His major contribution there was to undermine what had the week before
been called a GOP "consensus" on a ten percent across the board income
tax cut, saying: You can do a little bit of both," of the Republican’s
broad tax cut and President Clinton’s smaller, targeted, special interest
cuts. Going further, he volunteered there could be a compromise on the
GOP opposition to a minimum wage increase. Following this appearance,
the Speaker and Senate Leader Trent Lott issued an "Open Letter to the
American People," pledging to "work with the president" and, finally,
both traipsed over to the White House den to let the Fox personally
charm them and country anew. Are Republicans just too nice for this
nasty business of politics?
Either it is in your face, majority bluff and braggadocio or it is "civility,"
with its implicit acceptance of Democratic pre-eminence, hoping they
will not be nasty if appeased. While the polls show the overwhelming
majority of the people do not believe President Clinton, the Republican
leaders seem to take him seriously. Yes, they grumble quietly that they
do not trust him but the meeting and statement speak louder that they
do. Certainly, the congressional GOP needs to take a less pro-active
approach but that does not imply undermining the impeachment (with a
pending contempt citation and a charge of rape already following it)
nor compromising on every issue (which is why they lost seats in 1998).
Their polls say they need to develop a positive program to win in the
year 2000, but any political expert worth his salt knows the outcome
of the presidential race will decide who retains Congress, not the micro-policies
the legislature will churn upon its own. The fact is, if people continue
to distrust Bill Clinton, the Democrats will suffer in that race, as
already proved by the polls showing Al Gore losing to almost any Republican.
But the GOP continually thrusts credibility upon this terribly wounded
president.
How President Clinton dealt with the shell game of the week before illuminated
his strategy. He placed the Democratic issues of Social Security, Medicare,
and education at the top of his agenda. Adopting the minority mindset,
the GOP followed. The Open Letter proclaimed: "Along with Social Security
and education, we believe working people deserve the freedom to keep
more of what they earn, "placing their strongest issue third to two
Democratic ones. This was their reaction even though the Comprtoller
General concluded that "The president’s proposal does not alter the
projected cash-flow balances" of Social Security. Not at all. The Washington
Post’s economics columnist, Robert J. Samuelson, labeled this Clinton
proposal "deceptive." If you untangle the accounting, "what you find
is that Clinton is (as critics charge) double counting much of the surplus
and, worse, creating about $2.7trillion in ‘funny money,’ funds that
do not exist and whose purpose is to force future Congresses and presidents
to favor retirees over workers." Where does the money come from to pay
for the new Clinton programs (for bankrupt Medicare to cover prescription
drugs and Social Security to expand widows benefits, for example)? "Nowhere,"
says Mr. Samuelson.
On Medicare, even NBC News reported that, while Mr. Clinton accused
the Republicans of inaction, "it is the president who is avoiding though
choices." With "an eye toward Al Gore’s presidential bid," he "might
be more interested in making an issue of Medicare’s financial problems
than in solving them." On education, the president used his weekly radio
address to misrepresent both his and the GOP approach. At the same time,
Mr. Clinton’s associates told the New York Times he is out for "revenge"
against the Republicans.
In the face of all this, GOP leaders agreed to a meeting to give legitimacy
to the president’s plans. The GOP just does not have a clue. They should
have told the president his plan is a phony or they should have stayed
home. What are they doing saving the premier programs of the welfare
state as their number one priorities anyway? They are devoid of ideas.
Even the supposedly "bold" agenda of eliminating the marriage tax penalty
and enacting an across-the-board tax cut allows Lucy Clinton to kick
them away again when, for the umpteenth time, Social Security is advanced
to trump them without an additional strategy such as cutting the Social
Security tax.
Republicans complain that the Democrats are slaves to the polls, especially
in saving Bill Clinton from conviction on impeachment. In fact, most
Republicans read the polls and knew their base voters would have tarred
and feathered them if they did not vote impeachment.
Still, they are scared to death of President Clinton and the union money
too. So the GOP Congress will hunker down and follow President Clinton
like they did last year and hope their presidential nominee will save
them. That is why so many pine for Texas Gov. George Bush. He is a "winner."
He won big and did well among Hispanics, so he will carry all in on
his coattails. Of course, he won so big because he was supported by
the highest ranking Democrat in the state, whom he won by accommodating
him on the state budget just like the congressional GOP does with Mr.
Clinton. Presumably, the governor would follow the same route as president.
Only the national Democrats are not so supine as the Texas variety,
and no one has won nationally appeasing them-not even George Bush Sr.,
who claimed in 1988 his "mission" was to fulfill the Reagan revolution.
At their meeting the same week, the AFL-CIO pledged to spend a phenomenal
forty million dollars to win back control of Congress. It is a frightening
prospect to them, but the Republicans will need to fight. They do not
have the option activist leader Paul Weyrich presented of dropping out.
Fortunately, leadership need not and cannot come from Congress. Even
the best pre-Gingrich Speakers were almost anonymous (name the last
six). Only a president can inspire and lead the troops. But he must
be from outside, reject politics-as-usual, and he must truly be bold.
Donald
Devine, former director Of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management,
is a columnist and a Washington-based policy consultant and a Vice Chairman
for the American Conservative Union.
