Posted on 04/16/2005 9:13:32 AM PDT by Mobile Vulgus
It's just that simple.
The GOP has been out of the channels of power since FDR's Democratic Party co-opted socialism to remake their party into the "Party of the people" at the end of Hoover's term. That was in 1934, for those keeping track.
Previous to 1934 the Republican Party had long stretches of and often a choke hold on political power in Washington for most of the 74 years between the first Republican president, Abraham Lincoln, was elected in 1860 and Hoover's disastrous last days in office in 1934. The Democrats had to suffice with brief periods during Woodrow Wilson's immensely disappointing term and Grover Cleveland's barely remembered days in office.
But the GOP lost their potency when socialism became King and FDR became the patron saint of the Democrats. Again, that was 1934, 71 years ago. Nearly as long a stretch of time as the years during which they were the Party of power the Republicans have been out of power and they have grown prosaically used to being so powerless.
Some may say, "Now hold on a minute, aren't they the power players today?" Well, one might think so by looking at the ascendance of the Party locally as well as nationally or by listening to the conniptions of the mainstream media moaning about Republican excess. One could be excused for imagining that the GOP had retaken the controls of Lincoln's powerful machine and that they were ready to focus their sites on wielding that power.
One would also be mistaken to believe it, too.
Since the GOP began to get serious about winning elections in the 1960's with Barry Goldwater's abortive attempt to capture the White House, the Party has claimed that things would change if they ever got in power. No longer would Democrats run roughshod over them and no longer would the Dems set the agenda and run the show as if the GOP wasn't even in the theater. When Bush won a second term, the GOP claimed victory and said NOW was that time … they had arrived at long last.
Then Bush sent some judicial nominees to Congress and the wheels came off the bandwagon before the music was fairly struck. The Democrats played their tune of obstruction without sending the Republicans the sheet music and the GOP found that they had forgotten to even tune their instruments much less make sure to see that they were all starting on the same page of music.
The symphony of political power that the GOP assured us that they were ready to conduct has turned from a Beethoven masterpiece to the caterwauling more befitting a Yoko Ono. As John McCain croons in an off key imitation of Tom Daschle, saying he will support the Democrats in this judicial filibustering fight instead of his own Party, and as several other Republicans in the Senate run for the hills we are witness to Republican ineptitude at power politics.
Here is a challenge for the readers. Can you name a major political show down during which Democrats abandoned their Party and supported Republicans when they were in a position of national power? I would say that you won’t be able to find very many examples. In fact, you have to go all the way back to the days of Scoop Jackson or the absurd Democratic nomination of McGovern in 1972 to find any real dissention among Democrats. It's because they don’t do it. They know that unity is the key and that they can haggle within their party for their pet issues after the victory celebration. THAT is how to play power politics.
The Democrats know that they don't have to worry about 2 years from now, or 10 years or 100 years if they don’t win the fights today. If they need to get something done they get it done now. And they don’t snipe at each other in the process. Politics is about compromise for the most part, but someone still has to set the agenda, to write the rules, so that the issues are clear enough for compromise to have a starting point. Democrats are experts at this.
Republicans have for over 70 years been the Party led by the nose. They have been the henpecked husband of the domineering Democrat wife. They have smiled meekly for nearly three quarters of a century and made what minute gains they could as the Democrats set the agenda and offered the GOP some scraps from the table as an after thought. The GOP is apparently used to this role and they haven’t the spine to break out of it even when they have majorities in power all across the country.
In this judicial fight, the GOP has allowed the Democrats to set the agenda they have allowed them to create the goals and they have pleaded with them for a few scraps from the table just like they have done for 70 years. Senators like John McCain are more interested in being loved by the press corps than standing for the gains of his Party, one that a majority of Americans have supported.
This will lose the GOP the hard fought points that they have gained since 1994. And with no obvious presidential candidate to offer the voting public in just a few short years this could see a Democrat winning the White House in a cake walk in 2008.
After all, why vote for a Republican when the Democrats are controlling the agenda anyway?
So who would you suggest that the Republicans be replaced with?...... You've found the problems now what is the solution as to whom should have the power you want them to exercise....
We were having the same discussion this morning at breakfast. The Republcians had better enjoy their moment in the sun; Because it isn't going to last.
As ugly as the democrats are, they, with MUCH help from the media, will walk all over the Republicans. Wait until Hillary becomes totally vocal in 2008.
ALL of the US "Legislative" branch is WORTHLESS and begs TOTAL replacement with STRICT Constitutionalists. ALL 535 of them have the Washington DC disease and need replacement! If we as a people accomplished that then this republic MAY stand a chance beyond 20 or so yeas. Other than that be ready for rule by the DC, CA and the NE(Northeast) "elites" when Hildabeast wins in 2008.
We really can't do much. We did our share, we elected them. We can email, call and write till doomsday, they DON'T listen. Until we replace Frist and others, nothing is going to happen. Republicans, by nature, are well mannered. I don't want them to turn into democrats, I just want them to get some courage. We need more NEWTS...
Question:
Would you care to furnish the make up [numbers of Senators Republican vs. Democrats] for the years you specify all the power wielding?.......
That would be an interesting statistic to use in comparing how much power they really had.....
Question:
Can you supply the numbers asked in Post #5...... That will tell you how the power is divided and why things can get done or not get done in the Senate....
When I set out to work for a Republican majority government, I was hoping to get some fiscal discipline and a reduction in the scope and power of the Federal government.
What I got was the exact opposite.
I'm still trying to be optimistic, but it's getting difficult in the face of the evidence that our party seems to be as interested in reigning in the Beast as the opposition is.
I thought that was in 1933.
An interesting proposition.
IF we ever get terrorism under control and..
IF we get some constitutional judges and..
IF we get a promise that the RATs won't raise taxes and...
well, I'm not sure there is a reason.
...bring on "The Beast"
I wouldn't take the poison elixir just yet. There are many scenes to be played out, and the filibuster of judicial appointments, and now legislation, is but symptomatic of the large boil on Congresses butt.
It has been probed and prodded as the patient lays writhing in pain. Sooner or later it will be lanced.
All that is needed is for the doctors to get their courage up, which seems to be what you are saying. ;)
Democrats kick asses to get elected.
Republicans kiss asses to get elected.
Like I've said to others a million times, if the people wanted smaller government, they would have it. Win the hearts and minds of the rest of the populace, and the politicians and smaller government will follow.
Politicians being the spineless creatures they are, are too prone to simply sticking their finger in the wind.
Alway considered getting into power, making friends in the military, and declare Martial Law, while shutting down the Federal mess and retool everything compared to the Constitution. Sometimes a chainmail fist works better than a silk glove....
A blinding glimpse of the obvious: Democrats and Republicans are the left and right wings of the centrist ruling elite, which draws its strength from the strongly instilled belief of most of the electorate that "solutions" come from top-down exercises of power from "the center".
"Send me to Washington, and I will fix up the mess!"
LOL. Washington is "mess central". State governments, to the extent that they are more than provinces of the Federal imperium, draw on similar "solutions from the top" mentality. "UN world order" - - - just one order of magnitude more insane than "fix the mess in Rome-on-the-Potomac and all will be well".
Strengthen yourself, your family, your congregation, your community. Resist depredations from any higher level. Once the centrist idols are manifestly bankrupt, bereft of legitimacy, and impotent to continue their depridations, a generation or two will have passed, and our descendants will work out the rest. Focus on producing strong minded, well mannered, wise and capable descendants. There is no other way.
Very interesting read. Well done.
"more Newts"
Oh really .. well your darling has been all over the TV bad-mouthing Tom DeLay .. sorry .. but Newt needs to shut up.
"Oh really .. well your darling has been all over the TV bad-mouthing Tom DeLay .. sorry .. but Newt needs to shut up."
Yeah, I wish Newt would recall the 11th Commandment, but ... Newt did get us welfare reform and the Democrats even controlled the White House. Now we have the White House as well and all we get is a massive expansion of Medicare entitlements. Give me Newt any day, thank you very much.
Well, I am not suggesting "replacing" Republicans. I am suggesting that they don't know how to use the power once they get into Congress. No where did I say we need to dump the GOP!
What I am suggesting is that we, as voters, keep the pressure on them to perform. The Democrats have no problem wielding power. The GOP is timid. But they WILL get the message if we push them.
Frist has already found his presidential hopes are now probably finished because he has shown he is a weakling. Stick a fork in ‘im, he is DONE.
Besides, only a fool would imagine he could run for president from the Senate. Not a SINGLE one who has tried it in over 200 years has won the position.
Keep calling them and emailing them. Vote against any who are timid or too ready to let the Democrats set the agenda and stop donating money to the ones who show the yellow stripe.
Bottomline. The federal government is out of control and a bureaucratic mess. Sadly, Republicans are to blame for the current state of affairs in Wash-DC. PresBush did the right thing by cutting taxes, but his BIG government Republicanism has only fed the beast created by Democrats policies of the 1930`s and the 1960`s. Many of the advances made by the conservative politics of Reagan in the 1980`s and Gingrich in the 1990`s, has been ignored by todays GOP Congress and President.
You're right.
FDR elected in 1932, took office in January, 1933.
So you like Newt - he still needs to stop bad-mouthing Tom DeLay .. surely Newt remembers this attack being done to him and surely he could be supportive instead of adding fuel to the democrats. Good grief.
I don't support republicans who turn on other republicans - for no reason - Tom has not done anything illegal or unethical - and Newt should be out there exposing Reid's legislation which garnered hundreds of thousands of dollars for his 4 sons and son-in-law. Or how about Newt recall for the public that Nancy Pelosi has been FINED BY THE FEC FOR ILLEGAL DONATIONS ..?? Instead he joins the dems in smearing Tom .. that's not somebody I want to vote for.
Why did the people change and elect the Democrats and continue to do so in the modern era?... I have no idea but the numbers don't favor the Republicans even though they have a slight advantage.
Congress Rep Dem Other Vacant 37th (1861-1863) 31 15 3 1 38th (1863-1865) 33 10 5 39th (1865-1867) 39 11 4 40th (1867-1869) 57 9 2 41st (1869-1871) 62 12 42nd (1871-1873) 56 17 1 43rd (1873-1875) 47 19 7 1 44th (1875-1877) 46 28 1 1 45th (1877-1879) 40 35 1 46th (1879-1881) 33 42 1 47th (1881-1883) 37 37 2 48th (1883-1885) 38 36 2 49th (1885-1887) 42 34 50th (1887-1889) 39 37 51st (1889-1891) 51 37 52nd (1891-1893) 47 39 2 53rd (1893-1895) 40 44 4 54th (1895-1897) 44 40 6 55th (1897-1899) 44 34 12 56th (1899-1901) 53 26 10 1 57th (1901-1903) 56 32 2 58th (1903-1905) 57 33 59th (1905-1907) 57 32 60th (1907-1909) 61 31 61st (1909-1911) 60 32 62nd (1911-1913) 52 44 63rd (1913-1915) 44 51 1 64th (1915-1917) 40 56 65th (1917-1919) 42 54 66th (1919-1921) 49 47 67th (1921-1923) 59 37 68th (1923-1925) 53 42 1 69th (1925-1927) 54 41 1 70th (1927-1929) 48 46 1 1 71st (1929-1931) 56 39 1 72nd (1931-1933) 48 47 1 73rd (1933-1935) 36 59 1
Maybe you'd like to provide the numbers for FDR to today?
but Newt needs to shut up.
The overall thrust of the article is correct, but there are some factual inaccuracies:
1. FDR assumed control in March 1933, along with a Dem majority in Congress - not 1934.
2. Socialists in the Wilson era (1913-1921) laid some of the foundations (Federal Reserve, Income Tax, popular election of Senators) for the later expansion of government under FDR.
3. The most recent example of Dems actually having to compromise was over Ronald Reagan's tax reform proposal in 1982-1982. This was largely due to the desertion of the rump faction of the old-style conservative Southern Dems ("Blue-Dog" Dems).
Agree.
Well, it's comforting, isn't it, to think that what we're seeing is the Democrat's agenda? It may be comforting, but I'm not sure it's realistic.
I find it easier to assume that our representatives are doing exactly what they want to be doing and that what we see our representatives doing is what they want to be seen doing. And, we don't get to actually see too much of what they're doing, anyway. ;-)
You are right about the 1933 date, of course. I typed that too quickly, I suppose.
As to your other two points, I don’t see how they were "inaccuracies" in my original piece?
I don’t recall saying that the Dens never had any power until FDR. And the socialist leaning work of the Wilson era certainly laid some groundwork, but if the GOP stayed in strong power that groundwork would have led to naught. It was STILL FDR that brought them out and strengthened them in a socialist direction.
Lastly, I asked when the dems fought amongst themselves in a great public manner, not when they merely compromised. But still, I can accept your pointing out that they did try to fight Reagan’s policy.
Thanks for the reply.
Wow, those numbers were great. Thanks for the list. Where did you get them? Maybe you could do the numbers for the era after FDR if you have this source?
(By the way, I apologize for not seeing you ask that earlier. Somehow I did not see your post)
However, numbers are not the only game. The presidency is also important and the bully pulpit that he has to get his ideas across.
But there is one more large difference between today (and post FDR times) and yesterday (and pre FDR times). Government intrusion into normal people’s lives.
Before FDR made government the Nanny state that it has become, most Americans did not worry or think much about the Federal government. Only big business and state governments were much concerned with the Federal government.
This is where the GOP made such strong power plays and why the Dems never had a chance even when the Dem numbers in Congress were very close to parity at times (see the excellent list you provided). Big business WAS the GOP from 1870s to the 1930s.
Remember, at the turn of the century the Federal government was so weak that big business actually got together to float the Federal payroll to keep Washington open for business!!
It wasn’t until Teddy Roosevelt began his trust busting and Wilson attempted his progressive policies that the Federal Government started to poke its nose into the lives of the common man by attacking business and strengthening Unions and restrictions on business.
But, still, even with all that the Fed. Gov’t wasn’t as powerful until FDR turned it into the Nanny state. And he was able to do that by utterly ruthless politics. The Dems learned at his feet how to steam-roll over ANY opponent. Even Social Security was a grab for votes and had NOTHING what so ever to do with the security of the people.
FDR admitted that the Social Security Act, which we are burdened with trying to "fix" now, was nothing but a vote pandering device. FDR said, "I guess you're right on the economics, but those taxes were never a problem of economics. They were politics all the way through." This was a quote from FDR in reply to the fact that Social Security Payroll Taxes were a drag on the economy. (you can find this quote in Franklin D. Roosevelt: A Rendezvous with Destiny, by Frank Freidel. Published - Boston: Little, Brown, 1990, page 150 )
So here is the point of my little rant. The Dems know what power is. The GOP never knew what Washington power politics were because they were never in power when Washington WAS a power in the country in the first place. They do not have a culture of power politics like the Dems do. THAT is what WE must change as voters.
My original points 2 and 3 are better described as comments instead of corrections. As I recall, the action of the old-line Southern Dems in supporting Reagan caused quite a lot of infighting at the time and resulted in most of them being effectively purged from the party.
You're right about point 2 - but why didn't the Republicans of the 1920s undo some of the Wilsonian nonsense mentioned? Their relative inaction in that decade - in the wake of the disasterous Harding presidency - set the stage for the next seven decades.
We were having the same conversation at breakfast at house this morning!
The Republicans give in to the Dems without a fight so often that it makes me wonder if the Dem party has those FBI files that Hill and Bill just happened to "obtain" when they were in the WH. There has to be some reason that the Republicans cave so quickly and often.
---My original points 2 and 3 are better described as comments instead of corrections.
OK. Got ya.
---As I recall, the action of the old-line Southern Dems in supporting Reagan caused quite a lot of infighting at the time and resulted in most of them being effectively purged from the party.
Hmmm. I don’t recall it being a big public fiasco. But you are right that many dems abandoned Carter. But I seem to recall it wasn’t party politicians but voters that did that.
--- why didn't the Republicans of the 1920s undo some of the Wilsonian nonsense mentioned? Their relative inaction in that decade - in the wake of the disastrous Harding presidency - set the stage for the next seven decades.
I agree (and wish they had I have to say). However, who could have imagined that some of those relatively small changes would have lunged toward the Nanny state that FDR turned it into in the early 1930s??
You know there is a reason that socialism, Nazism and Communism never got a foot hold in the USA. Its because the voters (both GOP and DEM) are quite conservative and more religious than in the rest of the world. It took the sneaky cover of an FDR "caring" about the country to introduce socialism into government in my opinion.
Secondly, the Republicans seem to agree that the President has the right to set the agenda to some degree... Witness their approval of nearly all submitted court nominees by a minority President once out of committee... I think they approved all of President Clintons nominees if they got to a floor vote.
It seems to me that the voting populace has changed or doesn't demand from their elected officials the same things that they did in the past... Thus it may not make a whit of difference how much pressure is put on the ones elected if they are continued to be re-elected time after time...
Here are the numbers for the era beginning with FDR to the present.... The Republicans haven't had a large majority in many congresses but haven't used the tactics the democrats have used to slow down things either...
Congress Rep Dem Other Vacant 73rd (1933-1935) 36 59 1 74th (1935-1937) 25 69 1 75th (1937-1939) 16 76 3 76th (1939-1941) 23 69 4 77th (1941-1943) 28 66 2 78th (1943-1945) 38 57 1 79th (1945-1947) 38 57 80th (1947-1949) 51 45 81st (1949-1951) 42 54 82nd (1951-1953) 47 49 83rd (1953-1955) 48 47 1 84th (1955-1957) 47 48 1 85th (1957-1959) 47 48 86th (1959-1961) 35 65 87th (1961-1963) 36 64 88th (1963-1965) 34 66 89th (1965-1967) 32 68 90th (1967-1969) 32 36 91st (1969-1971) 43 57 92nd (1971-1973) 44 54 2 93rd (1973-1975) 42 56 2 94th (1975-1977) 38 60 2 95th (1977-1979) 38 61 1 96th (1979-1981) 41 58 1 97th (1981-1983) 53 46 1 98th (1983-1985) 54 46 99th (1985-1987) 53 47 100th (1987-1989) 45 55 101st (1989-1991) 45 55 102nd (1991-1993) 44 56 103rd (1993-1995) [1] 43 57 104th (1995-1997) [2] 52 48 105th (1997-1999) 55 45 106th (1999-2001) [3] 55 45 107th (2001-2003) [4] 50 50 [Jan. 3-20, 2001] 50 50 [Jan. 20-June 6, 2001] 49 50 1 [Jun 6, 2001-Nov. 12, 2002] 50 48 2 [Nov. 12, 2002 - Jan. 3, 2003] 108th (2003-2005) 51 48 1 109th (2005-2007) 55 44 1 [1] Note: Party division changed to 56 Democrats and 44 Republicans after the June 5, 1993 election of Kay B. Hutchison (R-TX). [2] Note: Party ratio changed to 53 Republicans and 47 Democrats after Richard Shelby of Alabama switched from the Democratic to Republican party on November 9, 1994. It changed again, to 54 Republicans and 46 Democrats, when Ben Nighthorse Campbell of Colorado switched from the Democratic to Republican party on March 3, 1995. When Robert Packwood (R-OR) resigned on October 1, 1995, the Senate divided between 53 Republicans and 46 Democrats with one vacancy. Ron Wyden (D) returned the ratio to 53 Republicans and 47 Democrats when he was elected to fill the vacant Oregon seat. [3] Note: As the 106th Congress began, the division was 55 Republican seats and 45 Democratic seats, but this changed to 54-45 on July 13, 1999 when Senator Bob Smith of New Hampshire switched from the Republican party to Independent status. On November 1, 1999, Smith announced his return to the Republican party, making the division once more 55 Republicans and 45 Democrats. Following the death of Senator Paul Coverdell (R-GA) on July 18, 2000, the balance shifted again, to 54 Republicans and 46 Democrats, when the governor appointed Zell Miller, a Democrat, to fill the vacancy. [4] Note: From January 3 to January 20, 2001, with the Senate divided evenly between the two parties, the Democrats held the majority due to the deciding vote of outgoing Democratic Vice President Al Gore. Senator Thomas A. Daschle served as majority leader at that time. Beginning on January 20, 2001, Republican Vice President Richard Cheney held the deciding vote, giving the majority to the Republicans. Senator Trent Lott resumed his position as majority leader on that date. On May 24, 2001, Senator James Jeffords of Vermont announced his switch from Republican to Independent status, effective June 6, 2001. Jeffords announced that he would caucus with the Democrats, giving the Democrats a one-seat advantage, changing control of the Senate from the Republicans back to the Democrats. Senator Thomas A. Daschle again became majority leader on June 6, 2001. Senator Paul D. Wellstone D-MN) died on October 25, 2002, and Independent Dean Barkley was appointed to fill the vacancy. The November 5, 2002 election brought to office elected Senator James Talent (R-MO), replacing appointed Senator Jean Carnahan (D-MO), shifting balance once again to the Republicans -- but no reorganization was completed at that time since the Senate was out of session.Data from the Senate website
Your description of the Dems' ruthlessness at playing the game is dead on. In addition to enacting the vast Ponzi scheme we call "Social Security", FDR and his cronies instituted payroll withholding for Federal taxes, which has the effect of leaving many folks clueless about how much the government is taking form them.
FDR and the Dems controlling congress pulled off first great assault upon the second amendment, a partial nullification, with the National Firearms Act of 1935. They also added two seats to the Supreme Court in 1937 so they could take control of the judiciary. This is not even to mention the birth of AFDC, various welfare schemes and regulatory agencies. The modern nanny state that is today's Federal government truly reached adulthood in 1933. It's been growing ever since.
Just contrast all of the above actions - taken in less than a decade - with what the Republicans have done since 1995, or 2001. There's no comparison. I'd say your basic thesis has been proved, MV.
Quite true!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.