Last week was not a good one for the Republican Party. On Capitol Hill, the Republican revolution of 1994 came to an ignominious and symbolic end with the resignation of scandal-tainted Tom DeLay, the former House Majority Leader. In the Senate, attempts to broker a compromise on an immigration reform bill not only failed, but resulted in highly publicized infighting between President Bush and various Republican factions. Meanwhile, the White House offered only a token defense over serious allegations made by former Bush insider Lewis Libby, who stated the president and vice president personally authorized the intelligence leak that disclosed the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame.
Every week it seems the American political landscape grows increasingly more favorable to Democrats. While the November election is still months away, it seems possible, if not likely, that Democrats will wrest control of both the House and Senate.
American history has repeatedly shown that when one party finds itself in control of all levers of government, that party often falls on its sword — most often due to hubris, factionalism, and scandal. In 1992, for example, the Democratic Party, freshly off Bill Clinton’s victory and in control of both the House and Senate, declared, “happy times are here again.” Torn by scandal and Clinton missteps, Republicans ceased control of Congress just two years later in the self-proclaimed “Republican revolution.”
Led by House Speaker Newt Gingrich, congressional Republicans implemented the Contract with America — a radical, conservative program of reform. The highly partisan Republican leadership zealously sought to cut taxes and government spending, while increasing the defense budget and touting an aggressive, America-first foreign policy. They also attempted to limit congressional perks and remove institutional regulations that had enabled Democrats to maintain control of the House of Representatives for 40 years.
The first major casualty of the Republican revolution, after foolishly trying to impeach Clinton, was Newt Gingrich who had to resign in disgrace when his own extramarital indiscretions surfaced. Next to fall was Dick Armey, the majority leader, who retired under pressure from Republicans.
The last of the troika was DeLay, who proved more ruthless than his colleagues. He was nicknamed the Hammer for his knack at enforcing party discipline, unwillingness to compromise even with fellow-Republicans, and fervent commitment to insuring Republican congressional hegemony. While certainly effective, DeLay is now under indictment for illegal fund raising, and is a central figure in the unfolding scandal involving lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
Many pundits see Bush’s inability to push his Social Security reform bill through Congress last year as the beginning of his political free-fall. Coming off his narrow, but conclusive victory in the 2004 presidential election, Bush boldly named Social Security reform as the top priority of his second term. It went nowhere, however, and cost the president considerable political capital. The recent Dubai Ports World controversy and the acrimonious immigration reform debate serve as solid evidence that Bush is now oblivious not only to public opinion, but his own Republican Party — which abandoned him on both issues.
Of course, it is easy to understand how Bush could misread the domestic political scene. He is no doubt distracted by the Middle East. The situation in Iraq grows worse by the day, and the war is now the most important issue to Americans — and a clear majority of Americans do not have confidence in the president’s policy.
Bush’s approval rating before the Libby disclosure was an anemic 36 percent, and will certainly decline further even within his conservative base. The exit of DeLay is a mixed blessing. Gone is a scandal-tarred pariah, but with him goes the Republican ability to pass Bush-touted legislation. Facing scandal himself, and with an increasingly ineffective Republican Congress, Bush will likely see his party punished come November. With the opposition controlling Congress, Bush will almost certainly face heavy pressure to withdraw from Iraq. On the bright side, perhaps like Clinton, Bush could use divided government as an excuse to fully engage in diplomacy.
— David Dumke is principal of the Washington-based MidAmr Group. Mail to: [email protected].
