Thread: Minority GOP still holds some cards in Congress

jsonline.com
Minority GOP still holds some cards in Congress
By Diana Marrero of the Journal Sentinel

Posted: Dec. 14, 2008

Washington - In just a few weeks, Republicans will no longer control the White House and they'll count on even smaller numbers in both the House and Senate. But don't write them off just yet.

The GOP can still have some influence in Washington, especially in the Senate, where one individual senator can hold up measures through a time-tested maneuver known as the filibuster, political observers say. Democrats are expected to have at least 58 senators in their caucus; it takes 60 to break a filibuster. In fact, Republicans were able to stymie a bailout for American automakers in the Senate last week.

Barack Obama won't actually need much support from the GOP in the House - where Republicans will be outnumbered by at least 256 to 175 - but the new president will have to enlist their help if he wants to be perceived as a centrist, move forward on his agenda and boost his re-election chances.

Republicans such as Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Janesville) say they are willing to look for ways to work with the Illinois Democrat to address some of the most pressing problems facing the country.

"We shouldn't just be a stick in the mud," he said. "We have to work with the Democrats in the Obama administration when we feel they're going in the right direction."

So far, it appears Obama wants to work with the congressional minority. He is already reaching out to Republicans on Capitol Hill, making phone calls to Republican leaders and sending his new chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, to meet with them.

Ultimately, however, Obama's ability to work with Republican senators is what really matters, said Lee Hamilton, a former Democratic congressman and director of the Center on Congress at Indiana University.

"What he's going to be asking himself is 'How many of those Republican senators can I break off?' " Hamilton said.

Republicans most likely to break with their party include: Maine Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Sen. John McCain of Arizona. Sens. Mel Martinez of Florida, Dick Lugar of Indiana, George Voinovich of Ohio and Chuck Grassley of Iowa also are known to buck their party on occasion.

Senate Democrats won't necessarily vote with one voice either, giving Republicans a chance to peel off senators such as Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Jon Tester of Montana and Robert Casey of Pennsylvania.

Sticking together

The last time Democrats controlled the White House and both chambers of Congress was in 1993, when President Bill Clinton took office. Although they were in the minority, Republicans were able to defeat some of Clinton's major initiatives by sticking together. They derailed Clinton's health care initiative and nearly defeated the 1993 budget, which raised taxes in an effort to balance the budget. Clinton's budget passed Congress without a single Republican vote and Vice President Al Gore had to break a tie in the Senate.

In recent years, before they regained their congressional majorities, Democrats were able to fight off President Bush's efforts to privatize Social Security. They also blocked a number of Bush's judicial appointments.

If they show similar party discipline, Republicans will have the potential to block Democratic proposals in the new Congress. But they are still expected to have much less influence than they've had in recent years. Republicans were in charge of both chambers of Congress and the White House before Democrats regained their majorities in 2006. And over the last two years, President George W. Bush has been able to block a number of Democratic proposals through his veto threat. That, too, will soon be gone.

"The Republicans will be greatly frustrated," said Martin Tolchin, a public policy scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center. "They will be unhappy."

Sen. Grassley, who has broken with his party on issues such as expanding access to government-subsidized children's health insurance, admits Republicans will have very little leverage, even in the Senate.

"What leverage we have will be dependent entirely on 41 or 42 Republicans sticking together," he said.

Whip has big role

Sen. Jon Kyl, an Arizona Republican who as minority whip tries to keep his party unified, says he will have his work cut out for him next year.

"It will be harder for us to prevail on matters that are important to us," he said.

The GOP's diminished Senate ranks, for instance, could mean a number of Democratic proposals that have languished amid partisan gridlock in the current Congress could have a better shot in the next. They include:

• A proposal to allow the federal government to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies for lower prescription drug prices for seniors who participate in the Medicare Part D program.

• A bill that would halt the deportation of immigrants who are here illegally if they entered the country before they turned 16.

• Legislation that would require soldiers returning from the Mideast to stay home for the same time they spent in combat.

Other legislation, such as broader immigration and health care reforms and efforts to fight global warming, still faces a tough chance of passing, however, unless bipartisan compromises can be achieved.

Importance of alternatives

To remain relevant, Republicans in the minority will have to propose good alternatives to Democratic initiatives rather than simply waiting for "Democrats to hang themselves," said Don Wolfensberger, a former high-ranking Republican staffer on Capitol Hill.

"They're really still trying to find themselves," he said. "But they'll begin to develop alternatives when they see what Obama and Democrats are putting up in the way of legislation."

Wisconsin's Republican congressmen remain upbeat about their chances to help shape public policy from the minority.

"We remain relevant by being very vigorous, pointing out the shortcomings of the Democrats' agenda," said Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Menomonee Falls).

How much Republicans end up working with Obama and the Democrats in charge of Congress will depend largely on the way Democrats choose to govern, he said.

"They have the votes to play the partisan card," he said.

While Sensenbrenner says Congress is now led by "ultra-partisan" leaders, Obama may be able to convince them that "it will be in his interest to work with Republicans."

Building unlikely alliances

Rep. Tom Petri (R-Fond du Lac) says there will be opportunities for Republicans to build coalitions with unlikely allies if Democrats try to push through proposals too far to the left of ordinary Americans.

"There are lots of opportunities to plow new ground or develop new ideas to become a viable alternative," he said.

He cites a so-called "card-check" proposal, to allow workers to unionize by collecting signed cards from a majority of workers instead of winning a secret-ballot election, as one area where Republicans might be able to form coalitions to oppose a policy idea he argues is widely unpopular with Americans.

But he also worries about whether Republican leaders can stay true to recent promises that they will return to being a "party of ideas" after badly losing in two consecutive elections that returned fewer Republicans to Congress.

"I hope that means we are starting with the problems and coming up with sensible solutions to the problems rather than starting with some ideology and some preconceived dogma and attempting to work the solutions into that dogma," he said.

Paul Ryan, however, argues that Republicans got in trouble with the American public by straying too far from their core principles of limited government and fiscal responsibility. And he thinks those ideas can easily be applied to modern-day problems by offering people more choices and less government intervention.

Most important, the party must show the public what it stands for instead of simply opposing Democratic proposals, he said.

"We can't just be the opposition party," Ryan said. "We have to be the proposition party and put out viable alternatives."

JSOnline.com For more political news, visit the All Politics blog at www.jsonline.com/blogs/allpolitics

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolit ... 48079.html

The GOP's diminished Senate ranks, for instance, could mean a number of Democratic proposals that have languished amid partisan gridlock in the current Congress could have a better shot in the next. They include:

• A proposal to allow the federal government to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies for lower prescription drug prices for seniors who participate in the Medicare Part D program.

• A bill that would halt the deportation of immigrants who are here illegally if they entered the country before they turned 16.

That would be just about ANY of them, wouldn't it?
Seriously, how are we going to convince the fence sitters to oppose any illegal alien amnesty?

Originally Posted by Captainron

The GOP's diminished Senate ranks, for instance, could mean a number of Democratic proposals that have languished amid partisan gridlock in the current Congress could have a better shot in the next. They include:

• A proposal to allow the federal government to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies for lower prescription drug prices for seniors who participate in the Medicare Part D program.

• A bill that would halt the deportation of immigrants who are here illegally if they entered the country before they turned 16.

That would be just about ANY of them, wouldn't it?
Seriously, how are we going to convince the fence sitters to oppose any illegal alien amnesty?

I believe a full Amnesty Bill will be a tough sell on the Hill right now because of the economy. Instead the OBLer's may try to use the Dream Act as a "Trogan Horse Bill" to test our resolve and get their foot in the door.

Nelson, McCaskill, Dorgan, Webb, Byrd and Sanders (all Democrats with the exception of Sanders who is an Independent; Lieberman is the other one) vehemently opposed S2611 (the original comprehensive immigration reform bill) in 2006 and S-1348 (The Dream Act) last year. I watched the entire proceedings of S-2611 on Cspan. The two most vocal opponents were Dorgan and Sessions as they were on the floor more than any others who tried to warn about the negative impact of illegal alien amnesty. Dorgan was the most vocal opponent of the Cross Border Trucking Initiative. I called their offices and they still as far as I know are opposed to amnesty. One can only hope.......

retiredairforce wrote:

Nelson, McCaskill, Dorgan, Webb, Byrd and Sanders (all Democrats with the exception of Sanders who is an Independent; Lieberman is the other one) vehemently opposed S2611

Sanders, McCaskill, and Webb weren't in the 109th Congress to vote on S.2611. The only Democrats that voted to oppose S.2611 were: Robert Byrd, Byron Dorgan, Ben Nelson, and Debbie Stabenow. James Jeffords, the only Independent Senator in the 109th Congress voted in support of S.2611.

For the record, Sen. Sanders loves open borders, illegal immigration, and illegal aliens.


Dorgan and Byrd (hopefully Byrd will last a few more years) are the only two Democrats in the U.S. Senate that I feel certain are in the bank (will oppose amnesty) for our side. Also, McCaskill and Tester are strong possibilities. I'm convinced Webb will support the right amnesty program. The reason he stood against the last attempt (which was not S.2611) was because his amendment didn't pass.

IMO, the U.S. Senate is a lost cause for us because there are just to damn many Republicans in the Senate that support amnesty. The U.S. House of Representatives is our only chance. Hopefully we can win over enough liberals there to keep us in the game.


Republicans that voted in support of S.2611 during the 109th Congress:

Robert Bennett, Sam Brownback, Lincoln Chafee, Norm Coleman, Susan Collins, Larry Craig, Mike DeWine, Pete Domenici, Bill Frist, Lindsey Graham, Judd Gregg, Chuck Hagel, Richard Lugar, Mel Martinez, John McCain, Mitch McConnell, Lisa Murkowski, Gordon Smith, Olympia Snowe, Arlen Specter, Ted Stevens, George Voinovich, John Warner

Republicans that voted to oppose S.2611:

Lamar Alexander, Wayne Allard, George Allen, Kit Bond, Jim Bunning, Conrad Burns, Richard Burr, Saxby Chambliss, Tom Coburn, Thad Cochran, John Cornyn, Michael Crapo, Jim DeMint, Elizabeth Dole, John Ensign, Michael Enzi, Charles Grassley, Orrin Hatch, Kay Bailey Hutchison, James Inhofe, Johnny Isakson, Jon Kyl, Trent Lott, Pat Roberts, Rick Santorum, Jeff Sessions, Richard Shelby, John Sununu, Jim Talent, Craig Thomas, John Thune, David Vitter

Some of them are gone now, however, this should give folks an idea of what we're up against in the U.S. Senate. Remember, the Senate passed the S. 2611 As Amended; Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006. It was the former Speaker of the House, Rep. Sensenbrenner, that prevented S.2611 from coming to a vote in the House. In other words, he saved our bacon.