Non-optimal optics
Let’s see: You’re the president of the United States, in the unenviable position of having to defend your tax plan against your own party. So you call in the Big Tuna of re-enforcements: former President Bill Clinton. The two of you meet, you set your stra-tee-gery (as W. liked to say it) and you go out to meet the press, which is in a froth for some red meat. Things are going well. The big guy has ‘em eating out of his hand, and in the process he’s letting Democrats know they better back your tax deal or risk being blamed for unleashing the economy from hell on America. But then a question comes your way, you check your watch and announce you’ve got to leave. The first lady is waiting. You head for the briefing room door, leaving the Tuna with the press while America gets the idea Mrs. Obama is tugging your leash. The optics? Not so good.
The last shriek?
U.S. House Democrats say the White House’s tax compromise with Republicans is a bridge too far for them. On Thursday the Democratic caucus held a non-binding vote rejecting President Obama’s tax deal that would keep income tax rates where they’ve been for the better part of the past decade. The deal also would temporarily lower the payroll tax and extend unemployment benefits. The last shriek of a House Democratic majority that’s about to go poof, or a rallying cry for progressives and liberals throughout the land? If taxes go up on all Americans in January, the backwash against Democrats might be fearful. “A clear majority of the U.S. House of Representatives supports this plan,” Rep. Dan Boren, D-Muskogee, said in a statement. “We are allowing the liberal wing of the Democratic caucus to hold these critically needed tax cuts hostage.” Maybe, but not for long. Even if Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her loyalists fight it out on last stand hill, you’ve got to think the new Republican majority’s first agenda item will be taxes.
Mr. Rogers’ neighborhood
The incoming chairman of the U.S. House Appropriations Committee is … Rep. Harold Rogers, R-Ky. Rogers is the pick of the Republican steering committee over Rep. Jerry Lewis of California in a contest between two veteran appropriators. The full GOP caucus was scheduled to vote on all chairmen Wednesday. Rep. Jack Kingston of Georgia was favored for appropriations by tea party groups, but really, it was Rogers vs. Lewis — who would’ve needed a waiver of GOP term-limit rules on committee chairmen to take the gavel. In terms of the recent elections, neither Rogers nor Lewis looks especially responsive to the anti-Washington, anti-spending wave that rolled through in last month’s elections. Both are Beltway insiders, and cynics have a point when they say each has piled up so many earmarks during their careers that entrusting either with the helm of the House’s chief spending committee looks dubious — that is, if the idea is to cut federal spending. Rogers has said he got the message on spending from the mid-terms. We’ll see.
Issue of conscience
If Congress repeals the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy that effectively bars gays from serving openly in the armed forces, no one will be more affected than the military’s chaplains. The Pentagon’s report on the potential effects of repealing the policy notes that some chaplains “condemn in the strongest possible terms homosexuality as a sin and an abomination, and inform us that they would refuse to in any way support, comfort, or assist someone they knew to be homosexual.” Not all chaplains feel that way, of course, but clearly a policy change would have ramifications for the spiritual role chaplains play. Among those most opposed to lifting the policy are Catholic chaplains, ministering to service members who comprise about 20 percent of the armed forces, according to The Washington Post.
It’s hard to predict what will happen if the policy is changed. Most likely, some chaplains will welcome the change, others will adjust and still others will leave the service rather than do anything they would consider a faith compromise. “If there’s no protection for the chaplain to be able to speak according to his faith group, that might affect the number of chaplains we recruit or our ability to do our duty for the troops,” the Rev. Douglas Lee, a retired Presbyterian Air Force chaplain and brigadier general, told The Post.
Voice in the wilderness
This week U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe reportedly was the only member of the Senate’s Republican caucus voting against a moratorium on earmarks — the process by which members of Congress designate federal spending on specific projects in their states and districts. Sen. Lisa Murkowski missed the vote because she’s in Alaska awaiting the conclusion of her re-election race but says she would’ve voted against the ban if she had been around.
As he’s explained many times, Inhofe believes the earmark moratorium is a lot of hot air over a relatively small amount of money (2 percent to 3 percent of total federal spending). And besides, he argues, the legislative branch is constitutionally empowered to appropriate funds. So, no, he’s not concerned about being a lone wolf on earmarks.
Nor on other stuff, either. He was an early opponent to the Obama administration’s cap-and-trade bill and his stalwart crusade against anti-global warming measures has earned plenty of bile from advocates. No matter. One of Inhofe’s favorite stories is about how he jetted to last year’s big climate change conference in Denmark, basically parachuting into Copenhagen for a couple of hours to be a one-man band in opposition — surrounded by a sea of people who didn’t agree with him. You need a tough hide to play the role of a voice crying out in the wilderness. Inhofe’s most certainly is.
The appropriations helm
Don’t pay as much attention to pronouncements from House Speaker-to-be John Boehner on controlling federal spending as to who ends up in charge of the new Republican House’s Appropriations Committee. Appropriations is where the nuts-and-bolts decisions on spending will be made and already there’s lots of jockeying for that chairmanship. The eventual winner either could be a great help to national GOP leaders on spending or an incredible hindrance.
According to Politico, former approps chairman Jerry Lewis of California wants another swing at the job. But that would require waiving the party’s term-limits rules. Lewis is known around Washington as the consummate appropriator — which is to say, the kind of insider who generally fared poorly in congressional elections earlier this month. Lots of Republicans and tea partiers want someone else to chair the committee, someone who will hold the line on earmarks and overall spending. After all, both were major themes in the just-concluded campaign.
But if not Lewis, who? Kentucky’s Harold Rogers would be next in line, but he, too, is a long-time committee member — whose commitment to spending restraint is automatically suspect. Politico reports Rogers is vowing allegiance to an earmarks ban and other reforms. And, big surprise, Rogers has been saying that waiving the term-limits rule would be a big mistake. It’ll be interesting to see how the leadership race pans out — Boehner will play a huge role — and whether fiscal hawks like Arizona’s Jeff Flake land spots on the committee. Certainly, both questions will be watched carefully by voters expecting change, not more of the same old, same old.
The gift that keeps giving
Nancy Pelosi’s decision to run for House minority leader in the next Congress is like Christmas come early for Republicans. Make that two Christmases. Here’s why: If Pelosi wins, lots of this year’s TV ads, signs, posters and Web sites with grainy images of the soon-to-be-former House speaker will be recyclable for 2012, as the GOP reminds Americans why they turned out the Democratic majority last week. Republicans are giddy at the thought. A “Fire Pelosi” sign outside one GOP building was replaced with “Hire Pelosi.”
Republicans aren’t alone in seeing the political risks of Pelosi’s lingering leadership. Fox News reports a draft letter from defeated House Democrats, being circulated on Capitol Hill, urges her to step aside. “Many of us want the chance to run again and reclaim the seats that we lost on Tuesday,” the letter states. “With you as the leader of House Democrats, the hangover of 2010 stands no chance of subsiding.” There’s no indication who has or will sign the letter. But the fact such a missive is circulating suggests Pelosi might face significant push-back as the leadership vote approaches.
Pelosi says she’s in
Current U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will be a candidate for minority leader as Democrats start thinking about handing control of the chamber to Republicans. Pelosi’s decision means there will be heightened drama when Dems pick new leaders. A number in the caucus, including Rep. Dan Boren, D-Muskogee, have said they won’t support Pelosi as leader. Blue Dog Rep. Heath Shuler, D-N.C., said he’ll challenge Pelosi if no other moderate else steps forward. The one to watch is current Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md. Hoyer is more moderate than the speaker, and their relationship is more professional than cordial. Hoyer might see this week’s election debacle as a signal it’s his time to be top banana. Current Majority Whip James Clyburn, D-S.C., also might jump in.
Pass the tissues, please
What’s your take on presumptive House Speaker John Boehner’s tearful victory speech Tuesday night, after it was clear Republicans had picked up enough seats to control the chamber starting in January? Boehner, derided for his perpetual tan and Washington insider-ism, broke down at several points as he described his pursuit of the American dream. Boehner’s personal story is a classic tear-jerker: huge family, working all hours in his dad’s tavern, putting himself through school — just about everything except scrawling his sums on the blade of a shovel by firelight. OK, the shovel bit was gratuitously cynical. Seriously, although Boehner’s known around Washington as a chronic sobber, regularly choking himself up during big floor speeches, Tuesday’s display looked like the real deal. The Boehner speakership has yet to unfold, but it looks like he’ll be a stark contrast to President Obama’s clinical, professorial manner.
Campaign ’10 last gasps …
A little around the horn on Election Day eve …
Seen: Last Gallup generic ballot reading shows Republicans with a 15-point lead. In 1994, the last big GOP wave year, the generic ballot lead was something like seven points. Gallup says Republicans’ generic ballot lead is large enough that regardless of turnout they’ll win the House of Representatives. The pollster says historical models predict the GOP “could gain anywhere from 60 seats on up, with gains well beyond that possible.” Sounds like last winter’s forecasts for the Washington, D.C., area: “Accumulations of two feet or more are possible …”
Also seen: The number of Americans who think things are going badly is 75 percent in a CNN poll — higher than it has ever been on the eve of a midterm election since the question was first asked in the mid-1970s. Pretty tough if it happens to be your watch.
Heard: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s closing weekend ads focusing on opponent Sharron Angle as extreme, pathological and unhinged. Not exactly “Morning in America.”
