Column: "Still a Republican? Barely"

“The most politically perilous entitlement mentality congressional Republicans have to rein in is their own,” National Review explained in its 19 December issue. “Michael Scanlon, Republican uber-lobbyist Jack Abramoff’s crooked colleague, has agreed to plead guilty to a conspiracy that showered gifts on lawmakers and their aides allegedly in return for official favors. He is now cooperating with the three dozen investigators and prosecutors in the Abramoff case who are reportedly examining the actions of at least six members of Congress and several senior House aides …. It seems the corrupt chickens and coming home to roost in the Republicans’ too cozy coup. If the GOP leadership fails to take the initiative and clean up the House, the voters should do it for them.”

“The voters should do it for them.” That phrase has been bouncing around my head for a week. Three months ago I would have said the Republican party’s problems outside Iraq were manageable and didn’t necessarily mean we had to sacrifice the majority. But now I’m not so sure – not only unsure, but starting to think that a good drubbing in November may be the thing to get federal Republicanism back on track.

I say “federal Republicanism” because those weaknesses plaguing Congressional Republicans don’t exist in the grass roots. Rank-and-file Republicans have yet to veer substantially off the traditional course: They still want lower taxes, smaller government, non-activist courts, an end to abortion, border enforcement, free markets, schools to teach students without indoctrinating them, a defense policy with teeth and the weaponry to back it up. Basically the same things they’ve wanted since Buckley slapped Yale.

Federal Republicanism ensured some of those, but subsequently erased excess goodwill with decisions having nothing to do with Jack Abramoff. In announcing $50 billion in “spending cuts” over five years, Congressional Republicans acted as though they had accomplished something significant, when in fact they had merely attempted to plug a ruptured dam with someone’s pinky finger. In supporting the Medicare prescription drug benefit, they set into motion a program that, even if run as efficiently as humanly possible, is designed to fail (like all federal entitlements) and will likely need to be reformed before 2020. Federal Republicanism has failed its constituents on the borders, school choice, farm subsidies, “torture” legislation … luckily, it had Terry Schiavo and Christmas figured out. Too bad neither was Congress’ business.

With Jack Abramoff, Newt Gingrich has found the issue that will launch his presidential campaign: Republicanism is settling into business as usual, Democrat style, and must force change in order to survive. “The Republican party has to be party of reform to make any sense,” Gingrich said on The Laura Ingraham Show last Thursday morning. “Abramoff, by any honorable, working standards of normal people who listen to your show … is totally unacceptable. It’s a despicable series of stunningly dishonest things, and I think it calls for very major, very significant reform.” But more to the point, “No lobbyist is corrupt unless there’s a member of Congress or a Congressional staffer who’s corrupt. This is a team experience …. Abramoff is a symptom of the system, he’s not the problem.”

Yes, there are Democrats on the Abramoff list. Yes, Harry Reid is refusing to return $47,000 while President Bush has returned $6,000. No, not every Congressional Republican on the list is guilty of something illegal, or even shameful. But outside Washington DC, there’s a palpable sense of unease, and it’s growing: This isn’t the party we elected, and it’s not the party we want – even one crooked Republican is one too many. Grass roots Republicans want to remain Republicans, but how else are they supposed to communicate their displeasure with the federal party’s current course? Vote for Democrats?

There are the usual ways: Withholding donations from individual candidates and diverting them to private organizations or religious charities; organizing various forms of written and telephone based protests; supporting reform minded non-incumbents in primary elections, et cetera. But there are those who believe federal Republicanism as currently constructed may already be too far gone and simply not worth saving, even if it means sacrificing the majority for an election cycle or three. For those, Independence – that is, becoming an Independent – is becoming a more popular option than you might think.

The party ignores the possibility at its own peril, though it should remember that irritated constituent bases have been responsible for far worse things than a loss of Congressional control. Bill Clinton’s first term, for example.

10 January 2006

** New update coming Thursday evening.