As California Republican Party Chairman Ron Nehring is fond of saying, in order for Republicans to take back our majority, we need to present a positive, contrasting message to that espoused by the other party. There is no part of the GOP’s message that is more important to that ‘contrast’ than the idea that Republicans stand for fiscal prudence, and sanity when it comes to spending. Unlike our Democrat counterparts, whose unfettered and free-spending ways are consistent with their view of a massive role for the United States government, Republicans should be able to coalesce around the idea of cutting federal spending, which happens to be consistent with our party’s long-time view that the federal government is too big, and spends too much.
We’ve made no bones about it here on this page that we wish that President George W. Bush had made significantly more use of his veto pen since his first election to the White House in 2000. Some significant and important vetoes during his first term would have really put the brakes on a lot of the increases in spending that ultimately played a significant role of the GOP’s loss of the majority. The fact that in his first term, the President never used his veto pen, even once, engrains into his legacy a lot of largesse and government growth. In an extensive post-election survey taken by the Club for Growth, one of Washington’s most respective and effective anti-spending organizations, it was clear that in a large measure Congressional Republicans were no longer being identified by GOP voters as standing for less spending and fiscal prudence.
As we approach the final year of Bush’s Presidency, he is apparently found a willingness to use his veto pen, perhaps the party of Hillary being in control of Congress has helped Bush find a reservoir of fiscal prudence that had been hiding in the Roosevelt room. I was very pleased to see the President’s veto of the abhorrently fat and bloated Water Resources Development Act (WRDA). The President’s request for funding on this bill came in just shy of $5 billion, which already seems a vast number. But before Senate and Congressional Appropriators were done larding it up, the bill overwhelming passed out of Congress with a staggering and amazing $23 billion price tag! Wait, before you lay the blame for this monstrosity of pork at the feet of Nancy Pelosi and her ilk, you should know that this bill passed the Congress on a lopsided 381-40 vote, and the Senate on a vote of 80-12.
Our California Delegation, especially our Republicans, needs to look at this situation and step back. Most of them voted for the WRDA, which is now part of the Congressional record, and while having a debate over whether Republicans should have cast that vote is a good question of politics and policy, we can’t change history. But we can MAKE history. You see, the President’s veto of WRDA represents the boldest move ever made by this President to stand tall for less spending and for fiscal sanity. The President’s veto is bigger than the underlying policy issue of the specific spending in the bill — it represents an opportunity for the GOP to draw a line in the sand, and reclaim the mantle of being the party of fiscal conservatism.
That is why our California Republicans, regardless of how they voted on the original bill, must now vote against Nancy Pelosi’s promised veto-override of the President. Frankly, I can’ think of anything that would send a worse message to Republican donors and activists, who are watching this vote, than to have Republicans participate in an override of President Bush’s veto — one that we all have been waiting and praying for since he was elected to office.
It’s really clear — a vote to OVERRIDE the President’s veto is a vote for more federal spending. A vote to UPHOLD the President’s veto is a vote for fiscal discipline, and putting on the brakes on over-spending in Washington. Perhaps most importantly, the vote to uphold the veto is one of solidarity with the President when he is doing the right thing. Members of Congress should put aside their parochial interests (as they are pressured to ‘bring home the pork’ to their districts) and prioritize the need for our Party to stand for fiscal prudence. As Ron Nehring says, we must present a positive contrasting message from that of the Democrats. Upholding this veto is an important part of doing just that.
[We urge FR readers to contact their Congressional Representative and urge them to uphold this veto. We will be sure to publish a final list of how every California Republican votes on this critical vote. Need more background? Check out this column by the Heritage Foundation’s Rob Bluey.]
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.