GOP battle cry: Repeal Obamacare, cut spending

On Sept. 27, 1994, 367 Republican House members and candidates stood on the steps of the Capitol and endorsed what they called the Contract with America. On Sept. 23 last week, 12 Republican House members stood in a hardware store in Sterling, Va., and issued a Pledge to America.

The interesting thing is that this year's Pledge to America concentrates more on substantive issues of governance than the Contract with America did 16 years ago.

Yes, the Pledge does include some procedural reforms (any House member can get a vote on an amendment cutting spending) as did the Contract (cutting the number of committees and committee staff).

But the Pledge to America also addresses two central economic issues and makes commitments that will embarrass House Republicans if they gain a majority but fail to deliver.

One is to roll back non-defense discretionary spending to 2008 levels. The other is to repeal — not revise or amend or embroider, but repeal — the health care bill signed by Barack Obama exactly six months before the shirt-sleeved House Republicans made their pledge.

The rollback to 2008 strikes me as good policy and politics — or at least good conservative policy and good Republican politics.

Good conservative policy because the Obama administration and Democratic congressional leaders vastly increased domestic spending in the 2009 stimulus package and the 2010 budget. With a Democratic president and Democratic supermajorities for the first time in more than 30 years, experienced and dedicated Democrats took out their wish lists and turned them into law.

In particular they increased the budget baselines for many domestic programs. Getting those baselines back down will make a significant difference not just this year but for years to come.

But wouldn't it hurt Republicans, if they have a House majority, to get into a budget fight as it hurt Newt Gingrich's new majority back in 1995? Not necessarily. The benefits from those spending increases are pretty invisible to the ordinary voters (though visible to public employee union leaders who give millions to Democrats). How many ads are Democratic candidates running bragging about these spending increases?

And despite the widespread consensus that Gingrich's Republicans lost the 1995-96 budget fight with Bill Clinton, they went on to win more popular votes and more House seats than Democrats in the next five House elections.

Moreover, the macroeconomy is in a very different place than it was during the Gingrich era. Then we were well started into an economic recovery, one aided by Republicans' partial victories on budget and tax issues. Money didn't seem scarce and shutting down the government seemed extreme.

Today we are in, if not an official recession, at least an agonizingly slow recovery. And if Democrats complain that it's unfair for government and public employees to be limited to what they got in 2008, Republicans can reply that an awful lot of their constituents would be very happy to go back to the income levels and the housing equity and the 401(k) balances they had in 2008.

Everyone has been suffering. Why should government be exempt? Wouldn't it function better if it went on a diet?

As for Obamacare, a few months ago Republican leaders were reluctant to call for repeal. They may have feared that Nancy Pelosi and Bill Clinton were right when they predicted the legislation would become more popular when passed. Or they may have been wary of sounding extreme.

But now they're squarely for repeal. It turns out to be a stand most Republican primary voters demand and most general election voters support.

Gingrich's Contract Republicans did not have such a target 16 years ago; Hillarycare had already fizzled weeks before they assembled on the Capitol steps. Today the demand for major reversals in public policy is much greater than it was back then.

One other thing is different. In 1994 Gingrich's Republicans were not sure they would win a majority; conventional wisdom around Washington was they would not.

Today chances for a Republican House majority seem excellent, if not absolutely certain. But no one knows how big a majority.

Can Republicans really repeal Obamacare and roll back spending to 2008 levels? Probably not. But by taking clear stands they raise their chances of getting part way there by 2012. And maybe farther later.

Michael Barone,The Examiner's senior political analyst, can be contacted at mbarone@washingtonexaminer.com. His column appears Wednesday and Sunday, and his stories and blog posts appear on ExaminerPolitics.com.

Barack ObamaNewt GingrichPoliticsUS

Just Posted

A large crack winds its way up a sidewalk along China Basin Street in Mission Bay on Friday, Sept. 24, 2021. (Kevin N. Hume/The Examiner)
San Francisco’s sinking sidewalks: Is climate change to blame?

‘In the last couple months, it’s been a noticeable change’

For years, Facebook employees have identified serious harms and proposed potential fixes. CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg have rejected the remedies, causing whisteblowers to multiple. (Eric Thayer/The New York Times)
Facebook’s problems at the top: Social media giant is not listening to whistleblowers

Whistleblowers multiply, but Zuckerberg and Sandberg don’t heed their warnings

Maria Jimenez swabs her 7-year-old daughter Glendy Perez for a COVID-19 test at Canal Alliance in San Rafael on Sept. 25. (Penni Gladstone/CalMatters)
Rapid COVID-19 tests in short supply in California

‘The U.S. gets a D- when it comes to testing’

Niners quarterback Jimmy Garoppolo led a late-game comeback against the Packers, but San Francisco lost, 30-28, on a late field goal. (Courtesy of San Francisco 49ers)
The Packers beat the Niners in a heartbreaker: Don’t panic

San Francisco is no better and no worse than you thought they were.

A new ruling will thwart the growth of solar installation companies like Luminalt, which was founded in an Outer Sunset garage and is majority woman owned. (Philip Cheung, New York Times)
A threat to California’s solar future and diverse employment pathways

A new ruling creates barriers to entering the clean energy workforce

Most Read