The theory behind this diary is that the experiences of being amember of Congress are fundamentally different from the experiences of being an ordinary citizen. When I was born, Harry Truman was President. I have no memory of him as President except the films or books that I read much later. Truman was gone while I was still an infant (age 1). The memories of Ike are far more distinct but certainly not those of an adult. I actually saw the man in the early 60s when I was a child. Kennedy is more distinct but Johnson and Nixon were real.
The working memories of those who served in Congress are different from those who merely watched on TV or even donated or worked in campaigns. Those memories, I would strongly suspect, shape the concept of what it is to be in power or to be in opposition.
For House Republicans, the notion of opposition is pretty much shaped and exemplified by their experience when Bill Clinton was President. Only five current Republican House mebers served while Jimmy Carter was President (Bill Young of FL-10; Don Young of Alaska; Jerry Lewis of California; Jim Sensenbrenner of WI-5; and Tom Petri of WI-6). Three of the five served one term or less (2 years) under Carter. None are now in Republican leadership although both Sensenbrenner and Lewis were committe chairs as recently as 2006 and are now ranking members but the two Youngs and Petri have no official leadership roles and the Youngs seem to have been put out to pasture.
Ronald Reagan may have huffed and puffed but he had to work with Democrats, in particular Tip O'Neill, to get anything done. The Reagan that House Republicans know is the myth and cardboard character and not the wheeler dealer of yore. Only 17 of the 178 Republicans actually served in the House while Reagan was President. Six more served while papa Bush was President (but not with Reagan). As for the remainder, 138 served while George W. Bush was President and 17 are new as of this session.
So, for Republicans, Reagan is a myth and George W. Bush is the only President they worked with/slavishly obeyed.
The experience on the other side of the coin is worse. As I noted earlier, only five Republicans (and two with influence) served while Jimmy Carter was President. The "lesson" of Bill Clinton is stark. Oppose everything, especially his signature piece of legislation using lies and scorched earth tactics if neccessary. You will be rewarded with legislative "success" and handed the keys to the kingdom via a landslide win. Impeachment, even for relatively small matters is a viable course but does not get either rewarded or punished.
There is no guarantee that Republicans will react as they did in 1993-95 nevermind the impeachment drive. The history and the experiences of the current crop of Republicans in the House are hardly encourasging for bi-partisanship. Change is good, particularly change from that bombthrower mentality. Maybe Obama can pull it off but good vibes should be taken with a grain of salt.
STATE BLOGS
