What We Learned from the Republicans Last Week

The Obama administration's successful passage of the stimulus package, although not the exact one they wanted, is a significant and telling victory for the new administration as it has been decades since a Democratic president has begun his term with a comparable legislative accomplishment. Although, the stimulus package had its detractors, and its passage was not exactly an easy process, it was a victory for the new administration and should put to rest concerns regarding the ability of this administration to get things done.

Much of the media coverage of the stimulus debate, from the beginning, focused on the problems the new administration faced in passing this major piece of legislation. During the time the bill was being considered and voted upon, two prominent cabinet nominees withdrew their candidacies for the cabinet, the Republicans dragged out old canards about socialism and Democratic spending and pundits tried to argue that the new administration had feet of clay. An implausible narrative that somehow Obama was Jimmy Carter redux, suggesting that Obama did not know how to legislate, began to emerge on conservative media outlets. However, things did not quite work out that way.

Instead, the administration and the new president demonstrated the same focus that made the Obama campaign so successful, and passed their bill. After initial efforts to seek Republican input were rebuffed, the administration rightly understood the Republican attacks to be a distraction and proceeded to round up the votes, including enough Republicans in the senate, to pass the needed legislation, rather than get drawn into a contretemps with essentially powerless congressional Republicans. The Republicans in congress, correspondingly, demonstrated that they, like most other political opponents of the president's, were unable to move Obama off of his plan or strategy.

Obama's success not only is a good sign about the focus and competence of this administration, but it forced the Republicans to reveal something of how they will play the admittedly bad hand they have been dealt, or more accurately, have dealt to themselves. In this regard the stimulus debate and legislation drew the Republican Party out a bit. This was the first meaningful reappearance of that party since their big defeat last November. It was not an encouraging showing or a good first step back towards relevance.

The Republican Party misplayed this issue in a number of tactical ways. First, by standing in almost complete unity against the stimulus, the Republicans put themselves in a position where if the economy begins to turn around, they will not be able to claim any credit whatsoever. Some Republican loyalists will undoubtedly assert that the Republican Party acted out of principle, not out of tactics, but the notion that the Republican Party still has any principles on which to stand, particularly with regard to spending policy, should not be taken seriously in the 21st century.

Similarly, some Republican strategists will contend that Obama and the Democratic Party will now take the blame if the economy fails to recover. If I were a Republican strategist, I would not want to stake my party's future on this notion because it requires two things to happen: the economy not to recover and voters to blame the Democrats for this even though the Democrats are the only party that has tried to do something to help the economy. It is also unlikely that anybody on the Democratic side of the aisle is going to let the American people forget the role of the Republican Party in creating this economic disaster.

The Republicans also showed that while they are able to make noise and even drive the news cycle, they are unable to have an impact on legislation. In the last two weeks, the Republican leadership in congress has shown that they can talk, but we already knew that. They have not yet, however, shown that they can become a partner, or even an obstacle, in policy making. This combined with Republican declarations of success in the middle of last week underscored the perception that the Republicans are more interested in creating problems for Obama than they are in being part of the solution to the dire economic problems facing the country. Overstating expectations, making cookie cutter complaints about a popular president and failing to propose productive solutions for ongoing problems is a recipe for continued irrelevance. This approach also creates almost no incentive for Democrats to join with Republican in opposition to the popular president. In fact, it has the exact opposite effect. The Republican's carping and attacking only strengthened Democratic Unity.

In the first weeks of his administration, Barack Obama has shown that he and his party are the only ones interested in the real challenges of governance. The Republicans have opted to remove themselves from the process. It is encouraging to see the president confront this challenge, risking his political capital for needed reform and stimulus. The new administration would be wise to build on this success by moving ahead quickly on other important domestic legislation in areas such as healthcare, environmental regulations and education before the Republicans either start trying to have a serious impact on proposed legislation, or find a way to act in a less polarizing way and weaken Democratic resolve and unity.

Comments

[faicole]

To say that Obama "lost" or "looks like a sap" because he didn't get everything he wanted shows a lack of sophistication about politics. Some compromise is required to get something done. President Obama still has 3 years and 11 months to advance his agenda. This isn't the only piece of legislation he's going to invest his energy in. If he takes the same narrow "my way or the highway" stance that the Republicans do, America is gonna be in sad(der) shape. Somebody has to raise the level of political discourse. I'm glad the president is proving himself to be the adult in the room and making genuine attempts to do so.

[zest]

Obama did the right thing and will continue to do so. However, let it not go unnoticed that Obama did learn somethings about how the opposition intends to operate. I think he paid a small price for a great deal of information.

[marignymitch]

Thanks for writing, Mr Mitchell.

But I think your posting suffers from generalities.

Obama indeed did 'win', but at great cost. By placating the implacable Republicans the bill was weakened significantly, which garnered him a total of three GOP votes and enabled Boehner et al to control the message. A strong corrective to our snowballing unemployment and depening crisis was needed. We got instead weak tea. By placing 'nonparisanship' above the need for powerful legislation (we got neither) Obama looks like a sap. And I'm a supporter.

[dizmo4]

You're wrong when you say they had no impact on the legislation.

In order to get the three moderates ( Collins, Snowe, Specter) the bill had to be gutted of about $100 billion worth of spending. Some of that was probably good , cut down on wasteful or non-stimulative projects but they also cut the $ for school construction, water infrastructure, Energy efficiencies.

Maybe those dollars will come in other pieces of legislation but to suggest that there was no republican impact is misleading. It also misses the major lesson of this , which is that REpublicans will attempt to kill any piece of legislation that offers a major change from the status quo. That means that Energy Policy, Health Care Reform, or further stimulative measures will face a filibuster. So either 1. The policy gets watered down to meet the demands of Specter, Snowe, Collins OR 2. Reid forces REpublicans to conduct an actual filibuster.

I hope #2 happens, but I fear that Reid is far too weak to pick that political fight.

[LWkcma]

I agree!! The repubes should either s#!^ or get off the pot.

[dsgeorge]

good piece of writing.........

[violettefemme]

I think my favorite cute thing that Republican'ts do now is to say things like "Obama better live up to the hype!"

I just answer that he already has, just by NOT being a shrub!

In his first short month, he has been and done everything we voted for.

I feel such a weight lifted...

[clarryr]

The Republicans are claiming to have found their voice again. I would say they never lost it. During the Bush Administration, any dissenting voice was greeted with "unpatriotic" or "traitor". Today they whine that their views are not heard even though the President reached out to them. Their voice before is the same as their voice today. It is the voice of hypocrisy.

[Poboy]

I think this analysis is shallow at best.

On the bottom line of this analysis, the Obama administration won and Republicans lost, is a surface analysis.

Obama won, but on a watered down bill, that may or may not have a stimulus, whole purpose of package, effect, and the Republicans may have succeeded in watering it down enough to have a minimal effect on the economy.

The Republicans may have benefited politically by including their concerns and amendments as part of the package, therefore receiving some benefit, but voting against it and launching a campaign for doing so, thereby getting something for doing nothing.

It was a horrible strategy by Obama, and one he apparently has come realize.

[ProudLiberalDemocrat]

I'm all for a stimulus package. But I also prefer a modest amount of fiscal restraint where possible.

Plus or minus $100-$200 billion is not a watered-down bill. The current bill is an appropriate starting point.

And in my opinion, President Obama lost nothing. He wanted a stimulus package and got one. We all won - even the Republicans who voted against the bill will win - because a stimulus package is necessary.

[runfastandwin]

Nice try, I guess, but no. This is the biggest bill ever passed in Congress, in economic conditions that are unprecedented in the world, let alone the USA, and he got it rammed through in record time, with 95 percent of what he wanted in there. If that's a horrible strategy then pigs are flying around right now.

Also if by losing ground in every poll, and being almost 60 percent behind the congressional Democrats in approval ratings, is what you mean by benefiting politically, then yeah, I can see that. And I need to go water my unicorn. Sheesh.

[Poboy]

"The compromises necessary to pass the recovery bill in the Senate damaged it in several ways. The overall size of the package was reduced, evidently for the cosmetic purpose of keeping the top-line number below $800 billion. And funds urgently needed to stabilize state and local governments and for construction were cut back, along with the credit against the payroll tax – evidently to make room for a rollback of the alternative minimum tax, a step with a strong political constituency but a weak economic rationale."

"It is difficult to know what the so-called moderate Senators were thinking. Do they have special insight into this crisis? Do they have their own forecasters, with deep understanding and good track records in these matters? Do they have their own models? Do they have, in other words, any ground for believing that less than $800 billion, spread over two years, will be enough to bring the economy back? If so, they weren't saying so, so far as I could tell."
James K. Galbraith

http://firedoglake.com/2009/02/16/what-is-to-be-done-next-steps-for-economic-recovery/

[Venicedread]

This is a very well written article.
The Republican Party has no solutions for the concerns of us regular folk.
They have plenty of solutions for rich people, to the detriment of us regular folk.
I'm glad that they are in across the board opposition to Obama.
After the way they've handled our country, they can continue to legislate themselves into oblivion.

[slowtono]

The Repubs did right, their constituents aren't upside down on a house. Do not live in a state with 60 billion $ of debt and presented a case for less tax when it is evident that everyone is going to be tripled tax, except banks and financiers. The question was raised Mr. Mitchell, why was there not one single voice of debate from the Democrats on the largest money grab in America's history? Not one. Did the Republicans act any different than the Democrats? Do you really believe in a country of one party, no questions asked? Be happy there are choices. If not your post would read, Your right.

[trinidadgirl]

Listen buddy ,this is not about dems and reoubs.. this is about helping the people in times of crisis. never forget that,ok?

[rdavies85]

The republicans are finally coming to face the uncomfortable truth that defines their paradoxical existence: they have no faith in government and yet they seek to govern.

Until they admit that the government has a useful role to play in the lives of the people, they will continue to have no useful role to play in government.

[sonoffestus]

A very good point that is generally overlooked.

[Soulsurfer]

The MSM is already writing obits for the Obama presidency, yet they DID pass the bill. His staff has made some stumbles, but they're quick learners, and seem to be able to recover or counter punch. I have great hopes for this administration, and admire their sincerity, unlike the party of "NO". We as a people have made the right decision in electing President Obama.

[NCRDIBULL]

Lincoln, we also learned from Democrats that not one would vote their constituents or conscience ... Every one goosestepped with the party line except Dan Lipinski who voted present ( something Obama has been known for)

[Irmanator]

The Democrats voted as the majority of their constituents wanted them to judging by the election results and the recent polls. i.e. people voted for Obama's solutions to the economic and social problems of the nation over McCain's.
I don't know what was in their conscience. 7 Democratic representatives in congress didn't goosestep with the party line.

[Pupadup4oBama]

i have to say, the comments and posts on here as of late have been so much more in-depth and insightful.
Great article!

[LRM216]

Only time will tell the answer to this. I pray Obama has made the right choices for the right reasons.