Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
John Shadegg for Majority Leader
January 27, 2006 11:22 AM
Up until a few weeks ago, if you had asked me if I cared about who the House Majority Leader was for the Republicans, I would have looked at you like you had two heads. Sure, I'm politically wonky, but internal GOP leadership struggles? Please.
But that's because I was being a bit of an idiot, and more to the point, not paying enough attention to the genuine battle over reform that is playing out in the leadership race. I'm not a diehard GOP partisan, and I don't think of the Good of the Party as a goal in itself. But I do believe in limited government; in expanding transparency and openness in the functioning of Congress; in limiting the power of lobbyists and raising the power of individual citizens. And of course, I believe in the corrupting influence of "pork" earmarks, and the need to clean up both those small fiscal disasters, as well as the larger budgety issues weighing down our national finances.
The Majority Leader race is turning out to be a referendum on exactly these principles. In one corner, as the frontrunner, you have Roy Blunt, who took up the reigns from Tom Delay and whose campaign slogan might as well be "business as usual". And on the other end of the spectrum, John Shadegg, who is leading a small but growing revolt among members who recognize that for the good of the GOP, and of the Congress and nation, it's time for real change, and real reform. (Somewhere in the middle is John Boehner.)
I don't warm to politicans all that easily. But Shadegg, with a 97% rating from Citizen's Against Government Waste on pork issues, impressed me with his anti-pork credentials. And his answers to our questions on policy and reform were good ones, showing not just a grudging acceptance of the need for a reform, but a real passion for it. And lastly, if intangibly: listening to the way he handled himself on the blogger call, I just plain liked the guy. He spoke candidly and openly; seemed honestly interested in answering questions, and sincerely committed to the ideas he was championing.
As Glenn points out in his own post in support of Shadegg, it is pretentious for a blogger to declare an "endorsement", especially for a leadership race in which nobody but Congressmen can vote. But for whatever it's worth, Shadegg has my endorsement, and my support.
It isn't my support that Shadegg needs, however. He needs Representatives, and most particularly: he needs the members of the Republican Study Committee, the conference of diehard conservative Republicans which he once chaired --- and he needs all of them. Many RSC members endorsed Roy Blunt before Shadegg entered the race, but have not yet publicly committed to support their former leader.
Even as somewhat of an outsider to hardcore conservative activism, I can see how baffling it is for RSC members to not be supporting Shadegg as the standard-bearer for limited government and reform at this crucial time. And if you're equally confused, there's something you can do.
The list below shows RSC members who are currently stated as endorsing Roy Blunt, along with their DC and district office numbers. Pick up the phone, give them a call, and urge them to give Shadegg their support. Especially if you are in their state, or even better, their district.
The next few weeks may well determine both the course of the Republican party for years to come, and the chances for real and meaningful reform in the way Congress does about business. If you care about either, pick up the phone, and help John Shadegg get the support he needs.
gop_jeff said:Shadegg, Shadegg, Shadegg!!!
I like his stance on gov't spending. Frankly, his election as majority leader will almost guarantee a slowdown on gov't spending - an issue on which the GOP has totally gone spineless on, to their shame.
THE WESTERN FRONT
Blunt Criticism
Will the State of the Union influence the House leadership race?
BY BRENDAN MINITER
Tuesday, January 31, 2006 12:01 a.m. EST
Presidents don't normally weigh in on congressional leadership elections. But tonight George W. Bush will take center stage in the well of the House to deliver his fifth State of the Union Address. Whether he intends to or not, the agenda Mr. Bush lays out will help determine who becomes the next House majority leader and in turn what legislative victories are possible this year. In tactical politics, this may be the most significant State of the Union since President Clinton used the speech to regain his footing in 1999 before his impeachment trial.
And judging by the president's news conference last week, Mr. Bush's speech is likely to come as a blow to the status quo candidate for majority leader, Rep. Roy Blunt of Missouri. Mr. Blunt has been the interim majority leader since Tom DeLay was forced to step aside in October, and during this brief stint in power, he hasn't shown himself to be a bold leader or even to have demonstrated an ability to keep a fractious Republican caucus united. It's a harsh but accurate verdict on his ability to lead that after weeks of trolling for votes, Mr. Blunt has not been able to win public endorsements from at least half of the Republicans in the House and therefore gain a lock on becoming majority leader.
The real blow to watch for in Mr. Bush's speech tonight, however, will be in how bold the president's proposals turn out to be. Already we know Mr. Bush will make health-care reform the centerpiece of his speech. If his proposals amount to tinkering on the margins, Mr. Blunt will likely breathe a deep sigh of relief. For it is reform--bold, serious, far-reaching reform--that is his biggest obstacle.
But another pitfall awaits Mr. Blunt: lobbying and spending reform. Mr. Blunt is unable to deliver a sharp break from the DeLay policies of the past because he is a part of the DeLay machine that has run the House for the past couple of years. He is so hardwired into the lobbying machine that Mr. DeLay used so effectively to win votes by raising money for other members that he married into it: Mr. Blunt met his current wife when she was a top lobbyist for the tobacco industry. He has also been a vocal champion of earmarks, additions to spending bills that members use to direct pork back to their districts. A few years ago Mr. Blunt went so far as to secured a $500,000 earmark for restoration of the historic Gillioz Theatre in Springfield, Mo. The theater's complex, which includes a few other buildings in addition to the Gillioz, was then renamed after Ronald Reagan (who as president vetoed legislation for containing too many earmarks). If Mr. Bush uses the word "earmark" at all, as he did in his press conference Thursday, look for a wince to shoot across Mr. Blunt's face.
That pain will be a reflection of how many Republican members are still undecided in the leadership race. If those members, as they return to Washington, base their decision on earmarks, Mr. Blunt is likely finished. The other two candidates in the race have much more solid credentials. John Shadegg of Arizona has made abolishing earmarks, or at least providing transparency so we all know who is abusing the system, a central theme of his campaign. The other candidate, John Boehner of Ohio, has famously refused to partake of earmarks and boasts that there isn't a single building or highway named after him in his district.
Counts vary, but there could still be dozens of undecided congressmen. The Republican Study Committee--a bloc of more than 100 of some of the more conservative House members--met in Baltimore yesterday and heard from all three candidates. The entire caucus will hear from them tomorrow, though thanks to Mr. Blunt members will not be allowed to ask questions of the candidates at the meeting. And the vote comes Thursday afternoon, so there is still plenty of time for voters outside the Beltway to let their voices be heard inside of Washington.
Mr. Miniter is assistant editor of OpinionJournal.com. His column appears Tuesdays.
gop_jeff said:Shadegg, Shadegg, Shadegg!!!
I like his stance on gov't spending. Frankly, his election as majority leader will almost guarantee a slowdown on gov't spending - an issue on which the GOP has totally gone spineless on, to their shame.
