Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
A Reply to Paul Rahe
Paul Rahe makes many good points and I agree with him that Republican politicians over-promised in 2010 and 2014. This does not strike me as particularly new. Further, I don’t agree that over-promising is a capital offense that merits the total dissolution of the party — and that’s what has been achieved.
The betrayal narrative overlooks the fact that most of the country is not solid red. The Republican Party also has to win votes from less ideologically pure parts of the country — places like Loudoun County, VA, and Montgomery County, PA. Most Americans, and yes, even many who vote Republican, hate government shutdowns and let their feelings be known. As the anti-government party, Republicans always get the blame for government shutdowns and always will. (Though at this point, this seems a moot point, since the Republican Party is about to be destroyed.) Republican leaders have to take account of their members who come from blue states too. Jim DeMint famously said he’d rather have 30 true conservatives in the Senate than a majority. He may get his wish very soon.
Prof. Rahe argues that “it is the president who shuts down the government” and dismisses the sorry history of Republicans always getting the blame by asserting that
Every time they tried they lost their nerve and backed down. Cowards who back down always get the blame. Think about it. Can you think of a single instance in which a man has taken a bold, brave stance and then later backed down in which he did not become an object of contempt?
Well, speaking of over-promising, Sen. Ted Cruz, a key leader of the shutdown effort, did a bit of over-promising himself. During his prolonged effort to keep the government closed until Democrats in the Senate and White House relented, he was asked, by Sen. Rand Paul, if he would ever agree to a compromise:
“My question to the Senator is, If he can’t get everything he wants, if he can’t defund ObamaCare, which is exactly what he and I both agree on, and millions of people across America want us to get rid of ObamaCare, if the Senator can’t, if he stands today and argues and cannot get rid of it, will he accept a compromise?”
Sen. Cruz replied:
The Senator’s question was would I vote for something less than defunding ObamaCare. Personally, no. Why? Because I have committed publicly over and over to the American people that I will not vote for a continuing resolution that funds one penny of Obamacare.
Yet, a week later, when the Republican Party’s approval rating had dropped to its lowest level since Gallup began asking the question (plunging 10 points in two weeks), Sen. Cruz voted to reopen the government without the repeal of Obamacare.
Arguably, shutdown theater cost Republicans the governorship in Virginia and distracted from the very instructive and shambolic roll-out of Healthcare.gov.
Despite their posturing, the shutdown crew never had a game plan. They could not hope to override a presidential veto. It wasn’t a matter of lack of courage, but lack of votes. They were playing to the conservative gallery (amplified a thousand-fold by talk radio hosts who have grown very rich by attacking fellow Republicans) and others who used this futile gesture to raise money.
Was that a “betrayal?” Maybe. But I’m supporting Ted Cruz for president now because there are larger issues at stake — namely, the survival of the conservative movement and the dire necessity of preventing Donald Trump from getting anywhere near the nuclear codes.
That dead elephant in your post, Prof Rahe, makes me weep.
Published in General
To my knowledge, Cruz voted or supported the reopening of the government without the repeal Obamacare through individual funding bills. The idea, as I understood it, was to get the Democrats to take shutdown off the table. My senator ,Rob Portman, introduced a bill that would take shutdowns/debt ceiling limits off the table, as I recall. I think Cruz et. al. were using the must pass legislation moment as an opportunity to obtain free media coverage of their opposition to Obamacare, nothing more, nothing less.
I don’t see how anyone can feel “betrayed” by the GOP, which has done so much to stop the laundry list of progressive dreams concocted by President Obama and liberal democrats in Congress.
I think a big reason for the rise of Trump is the constant talk-radio drumbeat against the GOP in office. This, clearly, is counterproductive.
In the end, a Congress that has ceded to the President the power of the purse is useless and contemptible. What is happening now was predictable. In the absence of backbone, no one commands respect. Trump leaves one with the illusion that he has backbone.
They don’t give it to the president, they exercise it to keep their jobs. It is much, much more unpopular to stop funding everything government does for weeks, and then months, than to stop funding everything as a means to bring light to a particular disagreement with the president. Ted Cruz exercised the power of the purse, but the power is limited by the desire for re-election, not the executive per se.
Mona didn’t say this exactly, but I think she makes the point that we’re not going to have truly conservative government, because not enough people actually want it.
Democrats certainly don’t, and lots of Republicans don’t push it because they can’t go against a good number of their constituents.
A few of us want conservatism, but not enough.
“Done so much” meaning “did not vote for”, Bucky? I take that as a bare minimum of any opposition party.
A middle schooler could have defended the “shutdown” better than Republican leaders. Americans hear about waste every week, but did Boehner and company refute the Democrats’ absurd claims that essential services must be the first budgets cut? The shutdown failed because they wanted it to fail.
Sorry, I must have missed that. The Republican Party has been dissolved? Does this mean I have to give back my secret decoder ring?
She’s referring to the millions of conservatives that won’t vote for Trump and may vote for Hillary or a third party. These folks will also vote against Trump supporters down ballot.
So despite the over-promising and betrayal, it’s not the party’s fault but… the voters? For wanting to believe? Except that capitulating in the face of poll numbers was the right thing to do. Somehow. And the GOP needs to represent Blue States as well. So it would actually be wrong to stick by its principles. Or something.
Those four umbrella stands are looking better all the time.
Great article, Mona. I agree, as usual…
If you go for a shutdown and then get thrown out of office to be replaced by Democrats who will increase spending, what the heck did that shutdown accomplish?
The Tea Party won. The Republican party is more conservative than ever. Paul Ryan and Marco Rubio are the liberal bogey-men of the Republican caucus now.
The Tea Party should be happy but they want perfect as the enemy of the good and now here we are. About to lose the presidency again, maybe the Senate and then who knows what the heck happens.
If you voted for Donald Trump, yes, it is your fault. Get over your emotion, think about what the candidates would likely do. Listen to what they say. Note what they omit. Don’t feel, think.
I’d like to think you’re drastically over-estimating the number of conservatives who are idiots.
I don’t think you’re willing to hear it from “establishment” Mona, but this is something we’ve been discussing since last summer. The very occurrence of Donald Trump as a figure, not to mention his popularity, means the end of the Republican party as we know it. We have 4 years to rebuild, and hopefully we don’t make the failed attempt to revive it. That brand is damaged beyond repair.
Yet again, I push for the new “Federalist Party.”
I am not. Trump is a fascist, and because of that, people will not be able to sleep at night if they believe they enabled him to obtain even a modicum of power.
Mona,
I don’t see how Republicans overpromised in 2010 and 2014. They expressed a clear program and set of values. They gained massive victories at the polls. It is the establishment, whoever they are, that decided this wasn’t what should be.
In Florida, I attended a county Republican Party committee meeting. There were a few people that one could consider “Tea Party” but even they had roots in the party that went back well before the Tea Party. The issue of common core came up. As you know Jeb! was a big supporter of common core. Governor Scott hadn’t gone one way or the other but was obviously leaning towards endorsing it. He was facing a tough reelection fight and Florida is not Texas there is plenty of blue here.
What amazed me was when someone finally brought the subject up and said they thought common core was a disaster they got cheers. At least 80% of the rank & file committee people hated common core. Never was it clearer that the leadership was ignoring the base and just ramming DC bureaucrat inspired junk down everyone’s throat.
A policy or a program is not right because it comes from Washington DC. It’s right because it’s right. Otherwise, we have a problem that just isn’t going to go away.
Regards,
Jim
They’ve made it pretty clear by nominating Donald Trump. The rest of us are left to vote 3rd party, or even Hillary.
LOL.
I agree to a point, however, the power of the purse was destroyed long ago by the rules and processes by which appropriations are now passed. The budgeting process, the automatic increases in funding, the scheme of using omnibus bills, the number of people and vital programs – like social security and medicare – effected directly by government spending, all have made turning off the spigot a very difficult and dicey proposition.
You can argue that none of these things should have been allowed. But the fact is that the political class designed this system specifically to make sure the spigot stayed on, because it is what keeps their pockets lined, their donors happy, and the votes rolling in. Retooling the entire appropriations process is the way to win back the power of the purse. Putting pressure on a system where all of the escape valves have been removed simply threatens to blow up the entire works.
So, I agree that the congress should be using the power of the purse to defend its prerogatives and represent the will of their constituencies better. But that starts by fixing the way that power is wielded, not expecting a broken and corrupt process to accomplish something it can’t.
Your first two paragraphs are in the passive voice. Only Congress can do what you describe, which is Rahe’s point. If they can’t exercise the power of the purse, no one is to blame but them.
Of course, since Republicans run the House, they could change all those rules tomorrow.
This is the type of idiotic magical thinking that is fueling the Trump movement. Ryan and McConnell could just wave their hands and make things happen!
Too stupid to even respond any further to.
The republican are not divided into just two ‘camps’: Trump voters and “establishment” republicans. There are quite a number of historically republican voters who’re very disappointed in the republican leadership who’re not supporting Trump. The current republican leadership seems quite content with big government, as long as they can manage it.
If we’re going to go down, can we at least go down fighting for something worthwhile, like freedom and limited government? It seems silly to “die” fighting to be slightly less vile and spendy than the other guys!
I’m not sure I understand your argument here. I believe all essential services continued to operate during the shutdown.
The problem is that nothing ever seems worth fighting for to the republican politicians. They seem to believe that there will always a better time, a better day, when they’re better positioned for a fight. So, we feel defenseless against the excessive spending, debt, taxation, growing regulations, loss of individual freedom, and defenseless even from the retaliation of our own gov’t (IRS))
The democrats are willing to risk a lot for their agenda – just look at what Obamacare cost them. Do you think they regret it? No way. Maybe couple of their members do, but as a group – they’d to it again! Because it’s in place, and the Republicans aren’t even talking about repeal anymore – just ‘fixing’ it. It’s forever now.
Their side takes risks and, over time, achieves their agenda, while our side is timid and afraid to risk, and loses everything over time. What a tragedy.
Mona, it is important to understand how Cruz’ shutdown looked outside of the Acela corridor: as no big deal and on the whole a good thing. This is why conservative commentators should not live around DC. Their vision is colored by the interests of their neighbors. When everyone around you is involved in government — directly or indirectly — it’s understandable how this effects your view on a shutdown. It’s easy to miss the value of the marker that’s put down by fighting. Understand that most actual GOP-leaning and independent voters did not see the shut down as a crisis or a failure. The heavy-handed response of the Obama Administration did plenty of damage to him.
The Democrats were happy to fight against the Iraq war, to change the attitude of the nation. We need to have that same willingness to fight. You don’t just pick fights you are certain to win, because then you will never set yourself up to win.
We got into this mess over generations, one ratchet at a time. It doesn’t get unwound over the course a term in the House or two. The temperature of the water has been getting raised a degree at a time for a century, now people on the right want “the establishment” to throw a giant block of ice in the tub to cool it off all at once. That isn’t a wise plan.
On the third page of comments on Paul’s post yesterday I argued it would have been imprudent to change Obamacare by the power of the purse. Here’s what I said:
There was a subsequent back and forth that was interesting. Paul later reminded me that the Democrats cut off funding for the Vietnam War. Yes, they did. It was a horrible way of making policy.
OK, so you’re lacking a basic understanding of how our Government works. No need to get upset about it.
I suggest you start here. Note the large majority of Republican members on that committee.
Good point.
Most people don’t understand that almost nothing is actually shut down during a shutdown. Clinton started the theatre of closing parks, and Obama turned it into high art. Aided and abetted by the media, and clueless or dishonest Republicans.
Yes, Klaatu, essential services continued during the “shutdown”, which is why I put it in quotation marks. But Democrats were allowed by Republican leaders to pretend otherwise and convince voters that a shutdown would mean people starving, unfunded schools, police and firefighters let go, etc.
Republicans didn’t fight the narrative the Left’s liars were pushing. The only explanations are that Republican leaders are grossly incompetent or that they never wanted the shutdown.
John’s point is that Congress constitutionally is permitted to not fund the government. His further point is that, politically, they would all get voted out of office and the basic functions of government would cease if they chose to do so.