House GOP splits into 2 camps: One flexible, one not

McClatchy NewspapersJuly 15, 2011 

WASHINGTON — There are two types of Republicans in the House of Representatives: the no-compromise bloc of die-hard conservatives, and the old guard who think that getting 80 percent of what they want is a pretty good deal.

The two sides rarely clash in public, but the schism is clear.

"I'm a conservative. I'm also an institutionalist. I want to see this place work," said Rep. Dan Lungren, R-Calif., who first came to Congress as a staff member in 1969.

But freshman Rep. Allen West, R-Fla., wants bold action now. "I've never been worried about being blamed for stuff as long as I stick to my principles," he said. "I didn't come here to kick the can 10 years down the road."

These differences in outlook could have a huge impact on resolving the impasse over how to cut federal spending while increasing the nation's $14.3 trillion debt limit. If that limit isn't raised by Aug. 2, the government risks default on its obligations. Treasury officials, business leaders and financial experts warn that economic chaos could result.

The key to passing a deal is the House, where Republicans have a 240-192 seat majority, with 218 needed for passage. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., the leader of the new-breed conservatives, has been the most visible negotiator, drawing attention not only for his hard line against higher taxes but also for his aggressive style. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, has shown more inclination to compromise.

The two men embody the House GOP's factions. Michael Franc, the vice president for government studies at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative research center, said that House Republicans could be grouped loosely into those elected before 1994 and those who came after.

The pre-1994 group, which includes Boehner, who was first elected in 1990, arrived in an era when Democrats had controlled Congress since the mid-1950s. House Republicans' voting records were firmly conservative, but legislative success for them usually depended on working with Democrats.

Then came 1994, when 73 freshmen Republicans were swept into the House after running on the "Contract with America," a conservative ideological agenda championed by then-House Minority Whip Newt Gingrich, R-Ga. The GOP won control of the House for the first time in 40 years, and Gingrich was named House speaker.

Last year the conservatives rose again, as 87 Republican freshmen were elected, many with the backing of the grass-roots tea party movement. The party regained control of the House for the first time in four years.

"People who got elected in 2010, they weren't shy about their campaigns. They weren't shy about what they believe," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who was first elected to the House in 1994 and is known for an occasional willingness to find common ground with Democrats.

Many freshmen feel pressure to resist raising the debt ceiling unless they get significant long-term spending cuts too. They think that "we shouldn't go home and say 'All right, we've raised the debt ceiling but nothing really changed,' " Graham said.

Yet because seniority matters in the House, most committees are run by lawmakers who were first elected before 1994. And they often see the younger hard-liners' desire to slash government across the board as too facile.

"Cutting spending is hard work. That's why we have committees," said Lungren, who chairs the House Administration Committee.

The old guard also came up in a system where it was important for committee chairmen to find consensus among their panels' members after holding hearings and debating issues, then present unified views to the rank and file in the full chamber. That code's eroded in recent years.

"Committee chairs would have weighed in and some kind of responsible position would have been found," said Burdett Loomis, a professor of political science at the University of Kansas. "Not today. And this, of course, makes any kind of bargaining incredibly difficult, almost impossible."

The new conservatives are often impatient; they see any vote for a higher debt limit as a fresh license to keep spending.

Rep. Paul Broun, R-Ga., has proposed lowering the debt limit to $13 trillion from $14.3 trillion today. He said that would "force politicians in Washington to make the cuts to our budget that our economy desperately needs."

House Republicans are weighing whether to debate a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution soon, a plan that's likely to be defeated if they bring it up. But it's worth trying, said House Republican Conference Chairman Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, because "these are not ordinary times. These are extraordinary times, and they demand an extraordinary remedy."

The new and veteran Republicans comprise representatives from almost all parts of the country, and their ages and occupations vary. But their division exists, and it was most obvious in February, when the House considered spending cuts for the current fiscal year.

Republican leaders planned to cut current spending by $61 billion; Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, proposed slicing an additional $22 billion, or 5.5 percent, from non-security spending.

His proposal triggered an unusually ugly floor debate among Republicans. Lungren charged that "across-the-board cuts are a lazy member's way of trying to achieve something."

Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., quickly responded.

"I would take issue with saying any member of this House is lazy or that this is a lazy process. Indeed, it is not," she said. "This government has overspent. We have to get it under control."

Jordan's effort failed, with 92 Republicans voting no while 147 voted yes.

At the moment, it's hard to find a lawmaker who'll discuss the GOP split publicly. Boehner and Cantor appeared Thursday with a dozen other House GOP leaders, saying that they were all, as Cantor put it, "on the same page."

Publicly, they are. However, small signs suggest that the veterans are willing to compromise, while none indicate that the new breed is.

One promising way to end the deadlock is a plan pushed by Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. It would empower the president to raise the debt limit without Republican involvement, although it wouldn't necessarily yield spending cuts. Boehner said this week that he could support it as a last-ditch maneuver.

But West, like many conservatives, hates the idea. "That dog don't hunt," he said.

The message from the new lawmakers is clear, Graham said: "What they're telling us is they don't care about the Republican brand, they don't care about 2012 politics, they care about the country."

That's the benign view from the conservative side, of course. On the other hand, if their no-compromise stand leads to financial and economic disaster, the country might not find them so noble.

ON THE WEB

Republican Young Guns program

Republican 2010 Pledge to America

President Obama's 2012 budget

Congressional Budget Office budget and economic outlook

MORE FROM MCCLATCHY

Cantor's role in debt talks could shape his future

Poll: Obama is losing public's confidence on economy

Factions in Congress, pressure from outsiders impede debt deal

McClatchy Newspapers 2011

McClatchy Washington Bureau is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service