House Republicans

There is no possible good outcome of the House GOP’s decision to torpedo the financial bailout package this afternoon.  In every scenario going forward the decision hurts the party politically – the only question is how badly. A couple of key rules of public opinion virtually guarantee this.   

Rule #1 – In a genuinely confusing situation, experts usually win. When voters know they don’t understand something, they’re generally inclined to listen to experts if enough experts speak with a clear voice. Ask yourself what the “common sense solution to the financial crisis” is. Guess what, there isn't one - and average people are smart enough to know that. 

Rule #2 – In a crisis, you never get blamed for doing something unless it can be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that your actions made things worse.  Libertarians hate this but it’s basic human nature to equate action with boldness and inaction with weakness. Deal with it. 

With Bernanke and an overwhelming chorus of normally somber economists are all screaming that the sky is falling unless something is done, opponents of doing something (aka House Republicans, thanks geniuses), face an impossible dilemma: 

-If the bill fails and nothing happens, no one gains anything. This is the best possible outcome for House Republicans. 

-If the bill fails and the economy tanks, they’ve wrecked the GOP economic stewardship reputation for a generation.  Not that it’s all that good right now.

-If the bill passes and the economy tanks, on one cares about the guys who voted no because the yes votes took a decisive action that had a huge amount of institutional support.  No one gets blamed in those situations. Especially since “I told you so” rarely wins votes and the electorate will be more worried about fixing things at that point. 

-If the bill passes and the economy doesn’t tank, then everyone who voted yes claims victory and every economist screaming for the bailout today is right there backing them up. 

The basic flaw in the House GOP’s logic is they’re mistaking a bunch of phone calls to their offices for an accurate barometer of public opinion (congressional office calls skew heavily towards the nutcase demographic) and they’re failing to anticipate how public opinion will evolve moving forward.  As a result, they're stuck in a no win high stakes situation and they’d better pray that an alternate package passes very soon.

Republican incumbents in close races have the easiest vote of their lives coming up this week: No on the Bush-Pelosi Wall Street bailout.

God Himself couldn't have given rank-and-file Republicans a better opportunity to create political space between themselves and the Administration. That's why I want to see 40 Republican No votes in the Senate, and 150+ in the House. If a bailout is to pass, let it be with Democratic votes. Let this be the political establishment (Bush Republicans in the White House + Democrats in Congress) saddling the taxpayers with hundreds of billions in debt (more than the Iraq War, conjured up in a single weekend, and enabled by Pelosi, btw), while principled Republicans say "No" and go to the country with a stinging indictment of the majority in Congress. 

This creates pressure on the "change" message. If this issue is made controversial, and Obama is not the first to make it an issue, how exactly is a Washington deal backed by  Bush's Treasury Secretary "change?"

But for this to be actionable, it has to be controversial. So this can't be a few lonely voices like Coburn and DeMint. It needs to be the bulk of the Republican conference. In an ideal world, McCain opposes this because of all the Democratic add-ons and shows up to vote Nay while Obama punts.

History has shown us that "inevitable" "emergency"  legislation like the Patriot Act or Sarbanes-Oxley is never more popular than on the day it is passed -- and this isn't all that popular to begin with. All the upside comes with voting against it.

A bailout may be inevitable, but so to can be the political benefit for Congressional Republicans if played correctly.

Being that, this is my first post on this great site, I figured I'd add my 2 cents on this subject. Sorry if this post is to long for ADD/Sound-bite folks out there.

How can I say this politely? My belief is that,  this whole "Republican Revolt" is a big political charade. I base this believe on a few things. Number One, I don't believe 90% of what comes out of a Politicians mouth. Number Two, when it comes to Government, I'm cynical and skeptical. And Number Three, if this issue is so important, than why hasn't El. President Bush called Congress back into a special session?

For that last one, I know what a lot of you are going to say. "But Czar Nancy, would only drop the gavel, and say session closed". True. But, wouldn't that show how "out of touch" Czar Nancy is with the American People? That leads me to believe, this whole thing is a Political Stunt and for "Sen. McCain to take this issue and run", as I heard someone say on B.T.R.

Now for my Number Two belief. Being that our own Government has created this problem, (both parties) I find myself feeling a bit lost, when I hear people who profess to be Conservative, calling FOR the Government to "do something". That to me, is a Socialistic as it comes. Being a person who is a Radical Free Market person, I see that anything involved with a "Government Fix" as losing more Economic Freedom. Or as President Reagan would say "Government is the Problem, Not the Solution".

And last but not least, my belief that All Politicians are not to be trusted 90% of the time.Give me a reason to not to believe this?

Now for my "solution" on this issue. One, Drill Here, Drill Now. Two, Get rid of the Department of Energy and the E.P.A. Three, Get Government out of the Economy. And for my last "solution". Being that this is 75% of the reason for high oil, and gas prices. End the Federal Reserve, and get the American Dollar (which Oil is traded in) back to being on some kind of "standard” Gold, Silver, hell, even plastic could work

My name is Regular Ron. I blog at "The Old Right Daily" and I approve this message.

I have been struggling for the last couple of days with the question of whether #dontGo is important. I am genuinely undecided. Here is some thinking on the positives, but also why it is not nearly enough and we need to keep our eye on the ball.

#DontGo is really important because Republican activists are feeling energized. There is something to fight for. This is new. People are chatting. But that doesn't make a movement.

#DontGo also changes the focus to Congress. The Democrats' strategy right now is to focus everything on Bush and the Presidential race. If Congress and its single-to-low-teens is the focus, even for a little, that helps Republican Congressional candidates.

But these are defensive actions. Republican candidates are coming to town and getting local press for fighting for something. That's great, but it is defense.

Where is the offense?

The only robocalls I know of are going into Colorado because Mark Udall skipped a vote. I asked Tom Cole about more ... and he ducked. I have not seen stories of people crashing townhalls demanding House Democrats do something.

Where are the existing groups? The American Family Association has a 3.3m email list and has emailed on this issue. Have they sent something out about charging townhalls? No. What about Newt Gingrich, American Solutions, and their 1.5m? No.

In general, it is not clear what exactly #dontGo would do to put points on the scoreboard. There are three options.

First, Congress could pass a bipartisan energy bill in September. There are now bills in bvoth the House and the Senate that would suffice, although the House bill is substantially better. We need Nancy Pelosi's buy-in to bring stuff to the floor. And to do that, we need to pressure Democrats. And no one is doing that.

Second, Congress could just let the OCS and shale ban expire. This is the premise of the "Energy Freedom Day" proposals. Some argue that this is better than a bipartisan bill. Here, we need either 40 votes in the Senate against a Continuing Resolution or a majority in the House willing to block legislation that contains an extended OCS ban.

Third, we can polarize the environment on this issue.

What I don't understand is how #dontGo is directly on the path to any of these. We need to actually win something. This is improtant. And I see more motion than movement.

There has been plenty of attention given to the House Republicans storming the floor and protesting the refusal of House Democrats to vote on legislation increasing the domestic supply of oil.

Aside from the great theatrics of it, something struck me: for the first time, I really saw John Boehner as a solid minority leader, not just of the House Republicans, but of the GOP overall.

Now, Boehner and the House Republicans had done a great job wrapping Nancy Pelosi around an axle with motions to recommit and other parliamentary maneuvers. Similarly Mitch McConnell schools Harry Reid day in and day out on parliamentary procedure, although it is probably a lot easier to be Senate Minority Leader than Majority Leader. But I don't think that I had ever really seen him clearly define both the Republicans and the Democrats on an issue with anything like the clarity or flair that we saw on Friday.

I have heard a lot of chatter about the leadership races after the elections, especially if John McCain were to lose. Who would be the symbol or the leader of the GOP?

After Friday, and continuing this week, one could actually imagine John Boehner in that role.

Hopefully John McCain will beat Barack Obama -- and you all need to work to make sure that happens --, and it won't come to that. But if he doesn't, I feel a lot better about our leadership than I had before.

Barack Obama's flip-flop on offshore oil drilling is a major strategic victory for House and Senate Republicans.

The Democratic plan was to reup the Congressional ban on offshore oil drilling as part of a long-term continuing resolution. Reid had originally promised a vote on offshore drilling, but has backed off that promise now that it has become a potent issue.

Now it is time to drive this issue home as a clearly branded Republican issue. The longer the fight goes on, the more it paints Democrats into a terrible corner. And there is a synergy between high energy costs and broader economic insecurity that will likely be the driving issue in November.

But let's review the dynamics that will lead to the win on this issue:

First, the dramatic events yesterday on the House floor telegraphed an intent to take this issue into recess. Undoubtedly, this is the major issue that Republican members will be talking about during the recesss. I would be shocked if there were not robocalls dropped in prior to townhalls in Democratic Congressional seats around the country. There will almost certainly be ads. Now the Republicans have a line that "even Barack Obama supports this, so why can't we get a vote in the House and Senate?"

Second, there is a bipartisan group of Senators who are pressuring Reid on this point, not to mention significant caucus-internal pressure on Pelosi. There will be enormous pressure from inside the Congress to force a vote on these issues.

Third, Republicans and conservatives are actually organized on this issue. Drill Here Drill Now has 1.4 million signatures and the American Family Association, with their 3.3 million person list, also seems inclined to play on this issue. You can expect enormous pressure from constituents on these issues.

Fourth,  an enormous majority is with us, and the higher-profile the issue is, the more people are likely to actually vote it. But the Dems have no reasonable action they can take until September while we pound them.

This will be fun. We have to keep track of what happens in Congressional districts and at town halls this recess.

More on that coming.

House GOP Leader John Boehner’s statement on the Housing Bill this week, which deserved the no vote he was urging, was utterly tone deaf.  Never, never write a sentence like:

“We must take responsible steps to ensure our financial and housing markets are sound, but the Democrats’ bill represents a multi-billion dollar bailout for scam artists and speculative lenders at the expense of American taxpayers.” 

Boehner later rephrased that same sentence at his press conference which predictably dominated the GOP's message on housing.  Republicans should always craft every message and statement assuming that any individual sentence will be picked out of context.  Period.

Voters who read a sentence like Boehner’s hear: "If you’re having trouble making your mortgage payments, Republicans think you’re scum." 

So how could Boehner and his staff have done this differently?  He should have emphasized the distinction between the thousands of people who were sold a bill of goods by shady mortgage brokers, and the shady mortgage brokers themselves.  For example, he could have said: “Our plan would help the people who have truly been victimized without bailing out the scam artists who earned billions by preying on honest folks’ dreams of homeownership.”

Incidentally, Heritage has some good principles that an effective homeowner relief bill should follow.