On national security, pork, immigration and the GOP
As mentioned, this morning I had the opportunity to attend a media row in the Capitol put on by the House Republican Conference. While there I talked with Speaker Dennis Hastert and Representatives John Shadegg and Brian Bilbray. Of course much of the discussion focused on the upcoming elections, but a few other themes emerged.
Hastert told me that National Security and Border Security were the number one issues for the GOP this fall. I told him that I agreed that National Security was the most important issue. On that issue, the GOP has been able to clearly set themselves apart from the Democrats who have been pretty clear about their lack of resolve in this area. But, I asked, how can the GOP clearly seperate itself from Democrats on other issues that are important to conservatives like shrinking the size of the federal government and tamping down federal spending?
Hastert said that the GOP can sometimes get “tied up in its own success…We have a flat line on spending.” Hastert told us that his first three years as Speaker Congress paid down the debt. Hastert went on to tell us that he abides by four principles in politics; 1. Purpose, 2.Passion, 3. Persistance, 4. Patience.
For their parts, Representatives Shadegg and Bilbray agreed that national security was the issue that should be front and center. Shadegg pointed to a recent article in the Hill newspaper in which Charlie Rangel all but admitted that Democrats would defund the war when they were in office. “I think this is one of the most important elections in my lifetime,” said Shadegg. “I believe that because we are at war.” Shadegg would like to see Republican candidates across the country repeatedly quote the terrorists in order to remind the American people of their intentions, “they want to kill us.”
But what about the fiscal conservatives? If Republicans maintain their majorirties in both houses of Congress by running on the national security message exclusively will Republicans continue with the status quo after the elections — meaning continued spending — In essence, is their any merit in hoping for a GOP loss in order to teach big spenders a lesson.
That kind of thinking “cannot be indulged in,” said Shadegg. Shadegg says conservatives have to focus on winning the majoirty in the fall and then work within the caucus to refocus the GOP on core principles.
Speaking of working within the caucus, Brian Bilbray told us about a 2005 meeting marking the 10 year reuinion of the class of 1994. That meeting is now referred to as the Scottsdale Accord. The entire class decided that it was their responsibility to remain true to the ideals by which they were elected in 1994 and it was out of that meeting that the Shadegg vie for House leadership arose. Bilbray, who recently introduced a government shrinking budget package, hopes that this class can increase its influence within the caucus and keep the GOP true to the principles the party rests on.
Leadership vs. Membership
One thing that John Shadegg pointed out was particularly striking. He did not agree with Dennis Hastert’s assessment about the GOP and spending but he pointed out a key difference between the two. Shadegg’s thinks leadership’s job is to pass legislation. He thinks membership’s job — meanining rank and file Republicans like him — is to pass as conservative a piece of legislation as they possibly can. It is an adversarial relationship that would serve the institution well if only more of Shadegg’s colleagues would adopt that view.
More photos here.