|
“Don't
go after Republican incumbents. Ultimately, that's
not how you build a governing majority."
--Rep. Tom Davis (R-Fairfax)
This
Davis quote emanated from his recent attack on the
national Club for Growth, an organization
dedicated to providing financial support to viable
pro-growth candidates to Congress, particularly in
Republican primaries. Davis recently assumed
leadership of the Republican Main Street
Partnership, which consists of 58 members of
Congress plus four governors.
As
reported in the Washington Post on July 12,
2006, Davis and the partnership’s Executive
Director, Sarah Chamberlain Resnick, said the Club
for Growth has complicated the re-election
campaigns of Rep. Joe Schwarz of Michigan and Sen.
Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island by attacking the
incumbents and supporting their primary
challengers. Conversely, Davis wants to maintain
the Republican majority by being “more
inclusive.”
Davis’
perspective begs the question: What good is a
Republican majority that permits out-of-control
spending and unchecked government growth while
repudiating just about every article in the
“Contract with America” that brought about the
Republican revolution in 1994?
Davis
said his members have diverse opinions on social
issues: "We recognize we're a big tent."
Funny that Davis would want to link the Club for
Growth with conservative social issues. He knows
better, as the Club promotes only viable
pro-economic growth candidates and does not take a
stand on social issues. By borrowing a page from
liberal pundits, the link of the Club to social
issues is nothing but spin intended to give the
impression that the Club consists of “extremist
social conservatives.” Davis banks that this
message will sell better to uninformed moderates.
For
a politician who has repeatedly spoken of his
statewide political ambitions, those are strange
quotes, indeed. No one doubts that Davis is an
astute politician. Accordingly, he knows that
perceived moderates and RINOs (Republicans in Name
Only) presently stand no chance of winning a GOP
nomination for statewide office in Virginia.
Furthermore,
last week Davis was instrumental in passing an
outrageous earmark — a piece of pork that makes
the “Bridge to Nowhere” pale by comparison.
His amendment to H.R. 3496 diverts $1.5 billion of
federal revenues earned through the offshore
drilling program to subsidize the deeply troubled
Metro transit system, which serves the nation’s
capital and his congressional district. In effect,
this earmark rewards Metro’s poor management and
allows it to continue operating without
implementing essential market-based reforms.
Before
becoming effective, Davis’ amendment requires
local governments in Metro’s service area to
raise an additional $1.5 billion in “dedicated
funding.” Needless to say, the communities that
are supporting this plan are already talking about
raising the sales tax to provide their share of
the matching amount.
Long
ago, Metro was built on a promise of becoming
operationally self-sufficient by the 1980s. Some
20 years later, it still runs huge operational
deficits and relies on massive taxpayer subsidies.
Metro’s operating revenues are only projected at
$627 million; yet its operating budget for fiscal
year 2007 is set at $1.79 billion. Metro’s
revenues barely cover one third of its operating
costs.
The
approved local subsidy from eight jurisdictions
that share in the cost of running metro is $488
million, the rest coming from the federal
government. In other words, Metro is already
receiving substantial funding from local
jurisdictions, but apparently that is not enough.
Although
Davis is portraying his amendment as a reasonable
solution for stabilizing the financial plight of
the Washington area’s transit authority, it
barely passed the House. The amendment required a
two-thirds vote of those present to pass, and
Davis mustered 242 yea votes, giving him a one
vote margin. One hundred and eleven Republicans
voted against it, while 83 voted for it. (I bet
most of the latter are also members of Davis’
Republican Main Street Partnership.) Of the
Democrats voting, 158 voted yes while only nine
voted no.
The
breakdown of the vote from the Virginia delegation
is even more telling. Of the seven Republicans,
five voted against it. The two that voted for it
were Davis and Frank Wolf, whose recent voting
record reflects that he has apparently abandoned
his conservative roots.
This
voting record clearly shows that when it comes to
spending and big government, Davis’ Republican
majority exist only in Davis imagination. Were
Davis honest, he would admit that he routinely
counts on his partnership to vote along with the
Democrats to advance their big-spending social
agenda.
If
the Democrats take control, Davis and his
“moderate” cohorts would lose their political
clout. Accordingly, they are collectively working
toward holding a Republican majority, knowing that
if they succeed they can then have their cake and
eat it too—they remain in power, while they
continue voting with the Democrats!
--
July 24, 2006
|
