In the wake of this week's House vote on the Obama economic recovery package, we learn that our brave new post-partisan world, as mcjoan wrote this afternoon, sure looks awfully similar to the old bitterly partisan world we've always lived in. And, as ever, we have the Republican Party to thank for this.
Let’s not pretend that the House bill, which passed 244-188 with precisely zero Republican votes, was exactly a shining moment for the party (although the fact that it has passed at all is certainly something of a victory for the administration). House Republicans see this as their own victory, and for the short term, they may be right.
They've managed to exact major concessions from the administration and House leadership on the $819 billion stimulus package, including the excision of family planning, of funding for public works projects on the National Mall, and the addition of major tax cuts for businesses...and proceeded to vote unanimously against the package anyway. Furthermore, they managed to turn the stimulus into a political wedge issue, even after winning on the oh-so-sacred tax cuts for big business (apparently the only issue of any consequence to today's Republican Party). It's an impressive, if cynical, example of political gamesmanship. It does not, however, have to be yet another case of the Democratic Charlie Brown trying once again to kick Lucy’s football. In fact, there’s no reason the administration and party leadership can’t use the stimulus vote as an opportunity.
House Republicans are laughing their tails off, and it’s no surprise; the Republicans trumpeted to every reporter within range the need for "bipartisanship", but when the administration and Democratic leadership tried to negotiate in good faith – and made many of the concessions demanded by Republicans – the GOP threw it directly back in the Democrats’ faces.
This should not have come as a major surprise. As Paul Krugman wrote, House Republicans have no concept of things like "compromise" and "consensus"; even when Democrats enjoy an 89-seat majority, it's still the Republican way or bust. That's how they define "bipartisanship".
Look, Republicans are not going to come on board. Make 40% of the package tax cuts, they’ll demand 100%. Then they’ll start the thing about how you can’t cut taxes on people who don’t pay taxes (with only income taxes counting, of course) and demand that the plan focus on the affluent. Then they’ll demand cuts in corporate taxes. And Mitch McConnell is already saying that state and local governments should get loans, not aid — which would undermine that part of the plan, too.
When push came to shove, the same Republicans who demanded bipartisanship turned the true partisans. President Obama and Democratic leadership went well out of their way to bring Republicans into the fold on the stimulus, only to learn that the Republicans don’t know the meaning of compromise. Being bipartisan –or post-partisan – only works if the other guys are willing to play along. Republicans seem intent on defining "bipartisanship" as, "getting everything we want even though we’re in the minority".
And if that’s the definition of bipartisanship, fine then. Forget about bipartisanship. It's not as though Democrats are the ones who need it.
Let’s be clear; American voters soundly rejected Republican governance in 2006 and 2008. If bipartisanship means governing like a Republican, then we don't want it, the Democratic Party doesn't want it, and most importantly, America doesn’t want it. The country has spoken clearly on the relative merits of Democratic and Republican governance; if the choice truly is binary, we win.
Now, Democrats have shown their willingness to make serious concessions in the spirit of cooperation. Obama and the House Democrats have indicated their willingness to negotiate in good faith. If House Republicans won’t respond in kind, then that’s their hangup. We don’t have to make any concessions to Republicans from now on. Our House majority is sufficiently large – 256-177, pending the nomination of Hilda Solis and the special election to replace Kirsten Gillibrand – that Democrats can essentially pass what they want without Republican support.
We don’t need to win Republican votes with this kind of majority, at least not in the House. All the House leadership needs to do to pass your legislation is win a few Blue Dogs, and it’s not even necessary to win all of them. The majority is big enough that you can live not only without Republican support, but without 20-30 Blue Dogs on any individual vote. Granted, legislation may subsequently be watered down so as to get through the Senate, but that’s going to happen fairly routinely in any case.
Democratic leadership has treated House Republicans with a level of consideration and respect that they’ve clearly indicated they don’t deserve. Very well, then; they shouldn’t get it from now on. We'll win without them, we'll pass what we want to pass, and they can do with that what they will.
Republican conduct on the stimulus wouldn't be so offensive if it were purely ideological, but what is most galling about the House vote is that House Republicans treated the stimulus vote like a political game. This vote was about the Republicans wringing every last tax cut they could out of the administration...and still getting to use the vote as a political football against the new President and the Speaker.
The new RNC chairman, Michael Steele, thinks it’s all very hilarious:
Republican National Committee Chair Michael Steele moved swiftly into the role of GOP partisan-in-chief Saturday, appearing at a House Republican retreat to praise members for their unanimous vote against the Democratic stimulus package this week.
Steele, who unseated incumbent RNC Chair Mike Duncan in a heated election Friday, jokingly told members that "we’re living in an era of bipartisanship."
But, he continued, Republicans sent a message with their staunch opposition to the White House-backed stimulus plan.
The House Republican whip, Eric Cantor, has the gall to continue screaming "bipartisanship" immediately after he personally defecated all over the spirit of bipartisanship:
"The onus is on Speaker Pelosi. She needs to meet with us. She needs to open her doors. We need to begin to work truly in a bipartisan fashion," he said. "We're trying to work with the White House. President Obama said he has no pride of authorship, so we want to go forward and make sure that we get a stimulus bill that works."
Republican Pete Hoekstra, putting the "twit" in "Twitter", had by far the most amazing interpretation yet seen of the House vote:
Interesting! The bi partisan vote on stimulus was no. It wasn't the winning vote but the only vote that received both R and D votes.
The NRCC, of course, has wasted no time in targeting Democrats on the stimulus package; in their infinite wisdom, they went after at least one Democrat, Bobby Bright, who wound up voting against the stimulus. This could be interpreted as a typical NRCC screwup, but my own opinion is that Republicans don’t really care how he or anyone else voted. For House Republicans, this was solely a political issue they could use to make hay in the future against the Big Spending Democrats.
Now, some Republicans are actually serious about the recovery package. Republicans who actually have to govern amid this disastrous Bush-led economy, Republicans who prioritize economic recovery over gaining House seats, actually support the stimulus. This includes the de facto leader of the Republican Party, Sarah Palin:
Their state treasuries drained by the financial crisis, governors would welcome the money from Capitol Hill, where GOP lawmakers are more skeptical of Obama's spending priorities.
The 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, planned to meet in Washington this weekend with Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and other senators to press for her state's share of the package.
Florida Gov. Charlie Crist worked the phones last week with members of his state's congressional delegation, including House Republicans. Vermont Gov. Jim Douglas, the Republican vice chairman of the National Governors Association, planned to be in Washington on Monday to urge the Senate to approve the plan.
For those who aren’t playing political games, the stimulus package actually brings both archconservative and moderate Republican leaders, like Sarah Palin and Charlie Crist, together with Democratic leadership.
That sounds pretty gosh darned bipartisan to me, also.
But House Republicans, knowing the bill would pass the House anyway, had nothing to lose by prioritizing politics over recovery.
Now, this should not merely be a teaching moment, but an opportunity, for Obama and House leadership.
This will not be the last piece of critical legislation over the next four years, and it will not be the last time the Republicans cry wolf on bipartisanship.
From now on, not only should Eric Cantor be ignored every time he mentions the "B" word, but the administration and their allies on Capitol Hill should take every opportunity to beat the Republicans over the head with this stimulus vote.
Every time the Republicans demand any kind of concessions in a House bill over the next two years, Democratic leadership should take the opportunity to point out the stunningly cavalier and cynical manner in which they handled the stimulus vote. Every time the Republicans protest that Obama is ignoring them, the President should take the opportunity to remind one and all that it was he who extended an olive branch to the Republican Party, and it was Eric Cantor who broke it over his knee.
The Seminal’s Jason Rosenbaum opines:
I don’t think Obama had to give up so much to get this result, but he’s in a perfect position to make the case that Republicans actually don’t want America to move forward, that they actually don’t want to get us out of this recession, that they have no new ideas and they are sitting there blocking the road, out of touch and uninspired.
And what’s more, if Obama and his strategists learn the right lessons from this fight, they may well be carrying a golden key that will unlock other major pieces of legislation like economic recovery part II (this bill is likely too small to do the whole job), health care, or the Employee Free Choice Act. Next time a big fight comes up, Obama has a perfect reason to not compromise - he did it last time and got nothing from it.
I’m sure the post-partisan rhetoric will continue. Let’s hope going forward, it stays in the meaningless camp. I don’t care how many lunches he has with the opposition. Or how much he talks about compromise. I just hope next time, he sticks to his guns, or at the very least, doesn’t give up anything without getting the votes in return.
I couldn’t agree more. It’s all well and good that House Republicans aren’t actually ready or inclined to work in a bipartisan fashion.
Let’s hope that our Democratic leadership has taken this lesson to heart, and that they will respond in kind in the future.