Republican tactics: a mystery?
After the election results, and given the enormous pressures for action on various fiscal, financial, and economic fronts, one might assume that the leadership (such as it is) of the Republican coalition would have sat down together and calculated how best to shape the course of events along the lines they prefer.
In such a calculation, further, one might think that they would reason thus: "We can shape various bills and policies during the urgent lame-duck session, when we still have much more influence, especially in the Senate, or we can wait until January when the Democrats are going to be much better positioned, institutionally, to roll us or to pressure a few weak reeds to get what they want (oh the socialistic horror of it all!)"
The First Duck has apparently gotten this point: he's been surprisingly helpful and cooperative with the Obama transition team. Not only is this probably genuinely better for the country than gridlock and obstruction (as even a dyed-in-the-feathers crimson Repuglican might admit), but it's his last chance to affect outcomes at all. Better a modest mortgage rescue plan with limits he favors, than nothing now, deeper crisis, and a sweeping Obama/Democratic plan in two months. Better a modest auto company bailout with as many strings as possible, and taken out of the existing funds, than nothing now, deeper crisis, and sweeping Obama/Democratic plan in two months.
Moreover, Bush's approach is working, from his perspective. White House pressure really did scale back the auto bailout and shift the funding to Bush's preferred source. Heck, even Bob Gates is staying at the Pentagon....not Bush's favorite guy, to be sure, but still, he's Bush's appointment.
But the Senate Republicans -- about to lose a substantial number of their seats in the New Year -- apparently haven't gotten the picture. They are huffing and stomping about how terrible ANY bailout would be for the auto companies, and that now's their chance to break the evil UAW forever...which is simply stupid. They are certainly able to block an auto bailout bill now, but if that leads to an escalating crisis in Detroit, they'll own the consequences. Moreover, an escalating crisis -- and some escalation does seem likely if a bridge loan doesn't go through -- will probably lead the new Congress in January to pass something much more sweeping. Yes, the Dems don't have a filibuster-proof majority, it's true. But with the Minnesota race likely to drag until who knows when, and with 58 Democrats/Independents versus 41 Republicans seated, it seems much more likely that the Democrats can peel off the one or two votes they need to suppress a filibuster...and even if they can't, repeated filibusters will have a devastating effect on the Republican brand, which is not exactly in great shape even now.
In short, the law of politics, one would think, is always: use your power and influence when you have it, rather than obstructing until you don't have any power and influence.
Pity that McConnell and his band of dimwits never took Politics 101!
In such a calculation, further, one might think that they would reason thus: "We can shape various bills and policies during the urgent lame-duck session, when we still have much more influence, especially in the Senate, or we can wait until January when the Democrats are going to be much better positioned, institutionally, to roll us or to pressure a few weak reeds to get what they want (oh the socialistic horror of it all!)"
The First Duck has apparently gotten this point: he's been surprisingly helpful and cooperative with the Obama transition team. Not only is this probably genuinely better for the country than gridlock and obstruction (as even a dyed-in-the-feathers crimson Repuglican might admit), but it's his last chance to affect outcomes at all. Better a modest mortgage rescue plan with limits he favors, than nothing now, deeper crisis, and a sweeping Obama/Democratic plan in two months. Better a modest auto company bailout with as many strings as possible, and taken out of the existing funds, than nothing now, deeper crisis, and sweeping Obama/Democratic plan in two months.
Moreover, Bush's approach is working, from his perspective. White House pressure really did scale back the auto bailout and shift the funding to Bush's preferred source. Heck, even Bob Gates is staying at the Pentagon....not Bush's favorite guy, to be sure, but still, he's Bush's appointment.
But the Senate Republicans -- about to lose a substantial number of their seats in the New Year -- apparently haven't gotten the picture. They are huffing and stomping about how terrible ANY bailout would be for the auto companies, and that now's their chance to break the evil UAW forever...which is simply stupid. They are certainly able to block an auto bailout bill now, but if that leads to an escalating crisis in Detroit, they'll own the consequences. Moreover, an escalating crisis -- and some escalation does seem likely if a bridge loan doesn't go through -- will probably lead the new Congress in January to pass something much more sweeping. Yes, the Dems don't have a filibuster-proof majority, it's true. But with the Minnesota race likely to drag until who knows when, and with 58 Democrats/Independents versus 41 Republicans seated, it seems much more likely that the Democrats can peel off the one or two votes they need to suppress a filibuster...and even if they can't, repeated filibusters will have a devastating effect on the Republican brand, which is not exactly in great shape even now.
In short, the law of politics, one would think, is always: use your power and influence when you have it, rather than obstructing until you don't have any power and influence.
Pity that McConnell and his band of dimwits never took Politics 101!
Advertisement





I think it's a preview of the Republican strategy to come: whine, bluster, and bite Obama's knees at every opportunity.
December 11, 2008 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I agree that we can expect that, in any event. After all, it worked for them against Clinton, right?
But in this case, they're really not getting at Obama, who has been very careful to give a general endorsement, but not get involved in the negotiations or details. They're making themselves look confused -- President for, House mixed, Senate against -- and obstructionist. They're certainly annoying the unions, which may get them some chops on the small business right. But they're also making it manifestly clear to big business (which doesn't love unions, but knows how to live with them) that they can NEVER rely on Republicans.
Now, big business has been party-agnostic for a while, if not covertly slightly pro-Dem, but this will certainly make them even less likely to support the out-of-power Republicans in the forseeable future.
December 12, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink