« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Speaker Boehner Learns from Mistakes, Commits to “Regular Order”

Republican leaders learn to stop falling for the Obama-Reid two Step

During the fiscal cliff, conservatives were frustrated to see many negotiation mistakes: Boehner pre-caving; seeing the Senate inaction that put the onus on the House when in fact the Senate needed to move; the aborted “Plan B” attempt;  letting the Senate string it out to the last day, so the House was left with “fait accompli or the Cliff’s on you” Hobson’s choice. Hoo boy … it was a train wreck you could see coming, and yet, it still happened.

Well, what happened? We fell into traps laid by Obama and Reid is what happened. Well, good news … a day late and trillion dollars short, but Speaker Boehner has figured out that being the patsy for the Obama-Reid Big-spender/even-bigger-spender routine didn’t really cut it. Boehner got quite candid about his fiscal cliff mistakes in a recent talk: http://thehill.com/homenews/house/279413-boehner-full-of-regret-over-fiscal-cliff-moves#ixzz2J7cYEeNk

“Looking back, what I should have done the day after the election was to make it clear the House has passed a bill to extend all of the current tax rates, the House has passed a bill to replace the sequester with cuts in mandatory spending, and the Senate ought to do its work,” Boehner said. “We’re ready, able and willing to work with the Senate as soon as they produce a bill. It should have been what I said. You know, again, hindsight is 20-20.”

The reasons the negotiations were toxic to Republicans were 3-fold:
1. They were with Obama. Not only is Obama a partisan Liberal who is not a flexible negotiator, he is also the wrong person because the real roadblock has always been the US Senate. A bill passing the Congress is the bigger hump than the President’s signature (who will sign what a Democrat Senate will pass.)
2. They were in private, not public. Speaker Boehner was subjected to goal-post moving, promised made then broken, public statements and grandstanding contrary to private discussions. We lose right there.
3. But worst of all, it got Reid’s Senate ‘off the hook’ for doing something and putting real Senate proposals on the table, while it cut out the entire Congress and their input, in particular putting House conservatives in the dark. For conservatives, it creates distrust as the process crippled their influence. For all the Congress,  it led to “accept this or the world collapses” choices, rather than amendable process.
Even in July 2011, I lamented the failure to adhere to ‘regular order’ as we saw mischief coming out of the White House ‘negotiations’. Via regular order, the House in 2011 produced Cut, Cap and Balance and the Ryan roadmap. The conservative proposal were never seriously considered in the Senate. They should have been, but they were pushed aside by the ‘deal’ that in the end backfired on Republicans. Anything produced via regular order back then would have been better. Similarly, the fiscal cliff deal, while not bad, was something that Speaker Boehner now admits would have gone better with a Congressional ‘regular order’ process:

Boehner now believes that effort was a mistake, and he has vowed to Republicans in the House that he will not negotiate one-on-one with Obama going forward. He is instead recommitting to a “regular order” process, whereby the House and Senate pass legislation independently that can then be reconciled with amendments or with conference committees.

This is good: It will keep Obama out of negotiations. Reid’s strategy of keeping the Senators out of  making tough votes is gone. Will the Senate and President balk at this? They can’t. In the end, legislation goes through a process and Speaker Boehner is simply saying he will not longer participate in futile and counterproductive attempts to short-circuit real legislative processes.
As someone who’s seen the “Obama one-on-one” negotiation strategy as a mistake for some time, I am left wondering “What took you so long?” but gratified the Speaker is moving up the learning curve and was humble (chastened?)  enough to go public.  It doesn’t mean victory for conservatives, there’s not even a conservative majority in the House, let alone 40+ real conservatives in the Senate, but it does mean the Republicans are learning not be patsys for the Obama-Reid tag-team that bloodies the Republican image while taking their lunch money, so to speak. So, whatever comes out of the ‘deals’ in March/ April / May when we hit the various CR and budget deadlines, the PR outcome won’t be so bad and the policy outcome will be ‘reasonable’ (and to the extent it isn’t, it will be grist for 2014 campaigns).
Speaker Boehner had another comment that indicates he is trying to repair bridges with conservatives, pointing out -  “Hey, I’m pretty conservative myself”:

“Some of our members don’t realize that while I may be a nice enough guy, and I get along with people, when I was voting I had the 8th most conservative voting record in the House,” he said. “But a lot of our newer members – they don’t know that. And so, you know, they think I’m some squish, that I’m ready to sell them out in a heartbeat, when obviously, most of you in this room know that that ain’t quite who I am.”

COMMENTS

  • arthurjake

    After being criticized once again for acting like a puppet for the DNC and everyone calling him mean names like RINO he admitted he could have handled the current mess a lot better. I am laughing so heard from reading this I can hardly type. Hey the reason everyone things your squeamish is because you are. The Speaker is quicker to throw up a white flag then the French. People can say what they want about Newt(everyone knows what comes with him) but at least he negotiated a budget deal and forced the the Senate and President to go along with it. He did it with backbone something the current speaker likes.

    Trying to mend bridges with conservatives? After not listening to them on the budget deal and shafting them on committee appointments he wants to mend bridges. I hope when conservatives actually take control of the House and he is no longer speaker whoever replaces him gives him the most worthless committee assignment possible.

    • commonsenseobserver

      Eh, does he want to stay? If I were him, I’d be retiring to some nice place in the Carribean and laughing away as the Tea Party votes to raise taxes by $4 trillion to “make the American people feel the pain of big government”.

    • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

      I for one found it refreshing that a politician at his level would even admit to mistakes, and be on target about what he did wrong. There is hope we will screw it up less next time. The Speaker has IMHO been over-criticized. He cant walk on water but neither is he the spineless jellyfish you make him out. Boehner’s humility versus the grandstanding and stonewalling of Clinton this week was quite the contrast.

  • tscottme2

    Boehner wouldn’t sell out in a heartbeat. He’d never last as long as heartbeat.

  • gawken

    Boehner is also crowing that they have “a deal” on immigration. We’ll find out about it this week. So, what happened to the “regular order?”

    • commonsenseobserver

      Well, I can’t imagine there’s an awful lot of regular order on anything other than the budget, and even that has disappeared under this administration.

    • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

      It’s folly to imagine a positive ‘deal’ could be made when the Democrat position is to basically reward lawbreaking and gut real immigration law. Real immigration reform would make immigration laws harder to evade, with E-Verify, visa tracking and ending catch-and-release and backdoor amnesties, and make legal immigration easier, less focussed on ‘anchor baby’ family migration and more focussed on employment-based immigration. that would be real reform, but the Democrats want a different path – gut enforcement and reward/create constituencies by turning illegal aliens into citizens.

      That said, it doesnt mean it wont be a ‘regular order’ type of process …

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/01/26/boehner-its-time-to-deal-with-immigration

      A spokesman for Boehner told the Post that Boehner was referring
      merely to conversations between members. “Informal groups of members
      constantly meet to discuss all kinds of issues–including immigration,”
      said spokesman Michael Steel.

      Steel told the Hill that no legislation is pending. “At this point,
      there is no such legislation scheduled for a hearing, let alone a
      markup, in the committees of jurisdiction in the House,” he said

      … Honestly, the best political and policy outcome on immigration would be for nothing to be done while Obama is in the White House. He will only sign a bad law and that law will only be served if it helps his goal of destroying Republicans and conservatives.

      • westcoastpatriette

        Agree with you completely wrt immigration “reform”.

        But as far as trusting that Boehner has had some sort of epiphany that should cause conservatives to trust him, not there yet. He should restore the conservatives to the committees he removed them from if he really wants to build bridges with us.

  • WmCraig

    Speaker Boehner talks a lot about what he will do, how he saved trillions of dollars that turn out to be nothing, that he made good deals that turn out to be bad. What Speaker Boehner actually is would best be described as a blue state Republican who owes his future to the hope Obama won’t get behind a democrat to run against him.

    Yes, Speaker Boehner said a lot of things. I don’t believe a word, and his track record in the past doesn’t give me any confidence in his new direction either.