The purpose of a political party is not electing its own party members to a majority of public policymaking positions. The purpose of a political party is to see the policies that are espoused by t
hat party enacted at the various levels of government. In the case of the Republican Party, it means that there is a serious challenge ahead of the GOP where Washington, D.C. is concerned. With a Republican President and GOP majorities in both houses of Congress, we have seen unprecedented growth in the size and scope of the federal government. So while the electoral mission of the Republican Party has been a success, Republicans are failing in the most important area — bringing our core vision of limited government and individual responsibility into public policy. On the contrary, while the Republican Party continues to wrap itself in the messaging that elected Ronald Reagan, the cold, hard reality is that the GOP has presided over largesse.
What is the solution? Well, one solution is for the Republican Party and its ancillary committees (The National Republican Senatorial Committee and the National Republican Congressional Committee) to start to pay attention to which Republicans are rebuking the major planks of the GOP platform. There needs to be a paradigm shift so that party registration does not mean the party supports your re-election. Or maybe better said — if a candidate for Congress, incumbent or no, had best be loyal to their party is they want their party’s loyalty to them. It’s a two-way street.
I can think of no better example of a Republican circular firing squad than this week’s debacle in Rhode Island. Look at the incumbent Republican – Lincoln Chafee. He supports pork spending like it’s going out of style, opposes repeal of the death tax, won’t sign a no-new-taxes pledge, supports hiking wage mandates on employers, has voted for price controls, opposes school choice, voted for that horrific McCain-Feingold campaign muck bill, and the list goes on. Let’s see — he voted against confirming Justice Sam Alito, and he publicly acknowledges writing in President Bush’s father’s name on his ballot rather than voting for the President. Every time there is a major initiative put over to the Senate from the House, Chafee balks. He really is not a Republican in anything but party registration. When we talk about why we cannot seem to get major items like tax relief and real spending reform onto the President’s desk – this guy is a major part of the problem.
The forces of sanity and desire to see the GOP vision for America actually enacted by Congress got behind a primary opponent to Chafee — Steve Laffey, a local Mayor in the small state. Organizations like the Club for Growth played a major role in Laffey’s insurgent campaign, and while Laffey did well (in the mid 40’s) – he fell short of toppling the liberal incumbent.
But then you look to see — what did the party do here? What did the President do (you know, the one Chafee says he didn’t vote for)? I know, with that atrocious voting record, you would assume the party stepped up to self-police, and worked to toss the bum out of there, right?
WRONG.
Actually the National Republican Senatorial Committee campaigned HARD for Chafee — as its head, Senator Elizabeth Dole, made protecting the ‘incumbent members of the club’ a higher priority than seeking a new nominee who, if elected (and yes, we acknowledge that Laffey’s general election would have been a tough battle – but a worthwhile one to take on) — would have been a team player!
So as long as Republican leaders in Washington, D.C., continue to see the mission of the Party as being to blindly support any incumbent with an "R" next to their name, they cannot complain when tax relief is stalled, regulations increase, spending goes up, etc.
Frankly, all that would have been necessary for Laffey to triumph, in the case of the Rhode Island Senate race, would have been for the party apparatus to stay silent. To send the message — if you, as an incumbent Republican officeholder are going to abandon your party on basic, key issues — then the party will not stand with you.
The whole thing is very disheartening. Now the party will be working hard to re-elect Chafee in November (I can hear it now, "Vote Chafee, he will protect our Majority."
It’s a good thing for Elizabeth Dole, et.al., that I don’t live in Rhode Island. I literally cannot imagine how I could remotely justify walking a precinct or sending a check to an incumbent Republican who, on a daily basis, attacks the Party of Lincoln.
I will end this commentary with a short note of encouragement to California Republican Congressional Delegation members. Today there will be a vote to start reforming the earmarking process. It is a relatively minor, short first step — shining light on the process and requiring earmarks to have Members of Congress’ names attached to them. That said, there is some sort of ‘turf battle’ going on as to how this bill is written, and so House "Appropriators" are not happy.
These Appropriations Committee members need to stuff it. First and foremost, as a party that is trying to reduce spending, far too much deference and prestige is afforded to members of a committee that has failed in its job. Spending is up massively, and the members of this committee continue to ‘pork out’ instead of stepping up. American government is fat, and it needs to go on the austerity program.
Anyways, we have two Californians on this committee — it’s Chairman, Jerry Lewis, and northern California Representative John Doolittle. It is our firm hope that both of these GOPers will vote for this bill and start the process of cleaning up the ‘earmarking problem’ that is so damaging the Republican Congress with voters.
We’ll be penning something on how this vote goes.
Have a great day!
Jon
Care to read comments, or make your own about today’s Daily Commentary?
Just click here to go to the FR Weblog, where this Commentary has its own blog post, and where you can read and make comments.