In 1994, House Republicans wrote and signed a “Contract with America” which outlined what they planned to do if they took control of the House of Representatives that fall. They did, ushering in Republican rule in the Congress until they were summarily voted out in 2006.
This year, many conservatives, sensing that the House is ripe for the taking, have been calling for another such document, one which would, again, outline their plans for leading the lower house of Congress.
Last week, House Republicans answered that call by unveiling “A Pledge to America” which would be “a new governing agenda built on the priorities of our nation, the principles we stand for and America’s founding values.”
As a campaign document, it is brilliant. The electoral tide is already going the Republicans way. Rasmussen Reports says that 66 percent of the country think that the country is going in the wrong direction. Only 18 percent approve of the Democratically-controlled Congress as per Gallup. And according to RealClearPolitics, a generic Republican polls four points higher than a generic Democrat.
All of the electorate’s enthusiasm is on the side of the Grand Old Party, and this document certainly captures it.
But as a document of policy prescriptions? The “Pledge” is sorely lacking.
The Pledge consists of five parts: Jobs, spending, health care, reforming Congress and national security. Republicans plans for job growth include keeping the Bush tax cuts, giving small business owners a tax deduction of 20 percent, reigning in the “Red Tape Factory” that is bureaucracy and repealing a part of Obamacare that requires small businesses to report to the Internal Revenue services any purchases that are more than $600.
There is not much to quibble with here, though the “Red Tape Factory” language is unseemly and vague for a political party to be using. Though government has little effect on jobs expansion, presidential claims about new jobs to the contrary. When the unemployment rate falls, look for whichever party is in power to take the credit.
It is the spending portion of this document that is hard to take seriously.
This section uses vague language, promising to “immediately reduce spending,” “cut Congress’ budget” and “reform the budget process.” There are almost no specifics, and where there are specifics, they hold little to no importance. They say they’ll save hundreds of billions of dollars, which means nothing with the government experiencing budget deficits of more than $1 trillion annually.
One cannot speak of balanced budgets unless Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are brought to the table. And they are notably absent from the Pledge, aside from saying they will give them a “full accounting.” Heck, Republicans argued against Obamacare by saying it will cut Medicare. The party is not serious on the issue of spending.
The rest of the document covers health care (“repeal and replace” Obamacare), restoration of trust in the Congress (“we will launch a prolonged campaign to transfer power back to the people”) and national security (“we will prevent the government from importing terrorists onto American soil”). All well and good, but it’s not likely that the health care bill will be repealed with a Democrat-controlled Senate and a Democratic president, they aren’t breaking any new ground by promising power to the people and their plan for national security is the same talking points that Republicans have been saying for the last decade.
All in all, this is an unserious document from an unserious party. Republicans are likely to take over the House, but to expect them to be any different than the edition that was rolled out from 1994 to 2006 is nothing short of folly.
Anonymous • Sep 29, 2010 at 7:45 am
“One cannot speak of balanced budgets unless Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are brought to the table. ”
-Forgetting a massive portion of our discretionary spending? I hate how it’s somehow better to have the conversation about skimping on taking care of the sick and elderly instead of cutting back on a burden we’ve taken upon ourselves to police the world with our Department of Offense until such a time when we can actually afford it. It’s completely telling of what they value more than the health and well being of the working class.
Anonymous • Sep 29, 2010 at 7:45 am
“One cannot speak of balanced budgets unless Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are brought to the table. ”
-Forgetting a massive portion of our discretionary spending? I hate how it’s somehow better to have the conversation about skimping on taking care of the sick and elderly instead of cutting back on a burden we’ve taken upon ourselves to police the world with our Department of Offense until such a time when we can actually afford it. It’s completely telling of what they value more than the health and well being of the working class.