Most House GOPers Bail on Contract with America

How far have House Republicans come in 12 years in control of the House? To what extent have they even lived up to their most sincere promises? As Alexander Bolton reported this past week for The Hill a whopping 58 percent of the House GOP caucus voted against a budget based on the hallowed Contract with America.

But Republicans seem largely to have renounced the Contract. Many conservatives believe the party's evolution of beliefs has led to the GOP's political troubles today: low poll numbers and growing fear that Democrats may regain power.

No vote is perhaps more emblematic of how the Republican majority has changed than the one former Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) cast two weeks ago against a budget resolution offered by House conservatives that was as nearly identical as possible to the 1995 budget resolution.

Like the House GOP budget of '95, the "Contract with America Renewed" budget proposed by conservatives this month sought to slash federal spending, place caps on Medicare payments, shift Medicaid payments to block grants and significantly restructure the Departments of Energy, Commerce and Education.

But unlike 11 years ago, when only one Republican voted against those proposals, 134 Republicans voted against them this time.

Frankly, I'm glad that the House did not pass the budget based on the Contract with America, either this year or in 1995. The Contract contained a failed set of policies that have been rejected by the American people as antiquated since the Herbert Hoover era.

But the fact that so many House Republicans would be willing to vote against their core credo shows that they have no credibility when it comes to fulfilling their policy promises. In other words, if the Republicans couldn't pass the Contract with America in 12 years in control of the House -- five years of which the party also controled both the White House and the Senate -- then can anyone believe any of their promises this election season?

The truth of the matter is no, you cannot believe much that the Republicans say. Although the GOP has been extremely successful in portraying the Democrats as a party with a finger in the wing, a party that governs based on polling data rather than convictions, the fact that close to three in five House Republicans voted this year against the basic tenets of Republicanism as embodied by the Contract with America is proof enough that Republicans will cynically say anything to get elected without concern for ever following through on their election eve promises. That's not the type of leadership Americans want, nor is it the type of leadership they need.



Display:


Re: GOPers Bail on Contract with America (none / 0)

It is also interesting that the complaints of mny conservatives--that the Party is not truly (small government) conservative any more, in some ways echo what critics of the Dems say too.

This reminds me of EJ Dionne's great book, "Why Americans Hate Politics".  Kabuki-like dances on issues that aren't really what Americans are concerned with.  Someone needs to address Iraq, health care, gas prices and energy sustainability, tax reform-raising the minimum wage-spreading the prosperity, and global warming in a way that radiates conviction and resonates with people.  


by Mimikatz on Sat Jun 03, 2006 at 09:01:15 PM EST

Re: Most House GOPers Bail on Contract with Americ (none / 0)

It'd be nice (to me) if the rallying cry for Democrats over the next five months was less that Republicans are evil (even though they are) but rather that they're clearly COMPLETELY incompetent.

If you think we should've invaded Iraq or not: We should've been able to win but these guys are incompetent.

If you think we should've revamped Medicare or not, it should be made functional, but these guys broke it because they're incompetent.

If you think we should build a wall or welcome everyone from around the world, we should be able to pick SOMEthing and make it work but these guys are too incompetent.

Whether we should've been ready for Katrina or not, we should've been able to be well on the way to recovery by now but we're not because these guys are incompetent.

Whether you think we need to drill in ANWR or build mile-long solar panels, we knew this crisis was coming and we were unprepared anyway because these guys are totally incompetent.

Whether you think we should be engaging in wiretappin domestically or not, these guys didn't even prepare for a terrorist attack when they were told they were about to be attacked- they're incompetent.

Short version: whether you agree with the ideology or not, these guys flat can't govern.  Maybe you think their hearts are in the right place (for some reason) but they flat can't run a country.  They've literally accomplished nothing.  Let's just keep hammering it home.


by Lucas O'Connor on Sat Jun 03, 2006 at 09:03:40 PM EST

Re: Most House GOPers Bail on Contract with Americ (none / 0)

Beautiful!  It reminds me in cadence and substance to Dean's address to the convention in S.F.


by antiHyde on Sun Jun 04, 2006 at 09:16:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

yes (none / 0)

the bad thing for the repubbbs, but the good thing for the dems, is this batch of repubbbs don't stand for anything other than grabbing and keeping power.

well americans will put up with alot but not that.

and also, luckily for us these guys are more incompetent than coolidge.


"blogtopia - yes, i coined that phrase!"
by skippy on Sat Jun 03, 2006 at 09:10:22 PM EST

Breaking Promises Is A GOOD Thing! (none / 0)

I mean, look at the promises, right?


by Paul Rosenberg on Sun Jun 04, 2006 at 05:10:16 AM EST

GOP Faithful on Taxes and Corps (none / 0)

The Repub. mantra on cutting taxes (to 'ease the burden, be globablly competitive, and grow the economy') - and NEVER raise taxes (except hidden increases that affect the working class) is about all that the Repubs have left from their playbook.

They never have said they would shill for the corporations with tax breaks, less regulation, and subsidies, but they regularly reward this block of the party by doing all these things.

Since the Repubs don't like government, they feel no obligation to fund it reasonably, but their record shows that by cutting taxes and supporting the corporations they end up spending the country deeply into debt - which they don't mind since the interest payments on the debt also enrich their base.

So, I guess in their own way, they are being 'responsible'.  They are fully responsible for inevitable failure of government to meet citizen expectations when funded inadequately.


"Pay any price, bear any burden"
by JimPortlandOR on Sun Jun 04, 2006 at 09:51:26 AM EST

Re: Most House GOPers Bail on Contract with Americ (none / 0)

I was just talking about Denny Hastert's abandonment of the Contract With America over at dKos.  The CWA has been thrown into sudden relief of course by Hastert's recent strenuous protestations  for special rights for Congressmen regarding warranted searches of their offices, violating the first of the CWA's pledges.  This has not gone unnoticed in the conservative blogosphere, as my piece notes.

More Pork Please
Another area where Hastert's Republican "leadership" excels in dismantling the CWA is in anonymous pork-barrel spending (CWA promise #2). Pork under Hastert rose more than 450% from 2,938 projects in 1999 to 13,997 in 2005 according to Citizens Against Government Waste.  Of course this is largely related to the abandonment of...

Term Limits?  What Term Limits?
When Majority Whip Blunt fronted the elimination of term limits for the Speaker's chair and it flew through without so much as a peep, I'd say that marked the definitive death of the term-limiting talk of the current GOP leadership.  Hastert (who signed the CWA) clearly has no intention of stepping down this year.  In January Rep. Flake (R-AZ) ventured to say that Americans wouldn't really believe the GOP had a "reformist" agenda just because DeLay resigned from his leadership post - what was really needed was all new leadership elections (including the Speaker's chair). He was, of course, politely ignored by Speaker Hastert.

Cato Institute research has noted that when Congresscritters don't limit their terms, fiscal discipline tends to go out the window in favor of the now familiar midnight pork festivals and no-reading-allowed bills, with the C-SPAN cameras politely pointed away from the wreckage.

The real question for me is, do the rank and file members of the GOP (I mean aside from Newt) care that the "leadership" has abandoned the principles of the CWA?  The upcoming re-election campaign for Hastert will tell us something about that.  But so far I'd say indications are they're more interested in being diverted from these inconvenient truths in favor of something more energizing, like, say, an unpassable gay marriage amendment.


by raisin on Sun Jun 04, 2006 at 10:01:38 AM EST

You Can't Trust Republicans (none / 0)

You Can't Trust Republicans -- with your hard earned tax dollars . . .

You Can't Trust Republicans -- to balance the budget . . .

You Can't Trust Republicans -- with your children's future . . .

You Can't Trust Republicans -- with America's Foreign Policy . . .

You Can't Trust Republicans -- with America's Energy Security . . .

You Can't Trust Republicans -- with America's military . . .

You Can't Trust Republicans -- with American's Health Care . . .

You Can't Trust Republicans -- to tell the truth about anything . . .


by ck on Sun Jun 04, 2006 at 02:42:35 PM EST

Re: Most House GOPers Bail on Contract with Americ (none / 0)

/0
/1
/2
/3
/4
/5
/6
/7
/8
/9
/10
/11
/12
/13
/14
/15

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30

31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50

51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65

66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81

82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

59
60
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88

30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58

89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29

30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45

46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59


by davidsebasy on Sat Feb 03, 2007 at 11:41:28 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.