RSS Feed MenuThe moderate wing of the Republican Party was reborn Saturday in the United States Senate. Eight Republicans — Scott Brown of Massachusetts, Mark Kirk of Illinois, Richard Burr of North Carolina, John Ensign of Nevada, George Voinovich of Ohio, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Maine’s Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins — crossed party lines to vote with the Democrats to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” If you add Senator Richard Lugar, who is leading the charge to ratify START and Senator Lindsey Graham, the Obama administration’s go to Republican in the Senate, the number of Senate Republicans with established moderate credentials moves to double digits.
What makes this bunch so appealing is that they actually seem to think about the issues before they vote on them. For example, while the party ideologues on both sides voted for (or against) both DREAM and DADT repeal. Senator Kirk voted for repealing DADT (“As a 21-year Navy Reserve officer, I believe it is important for military leaders, not federal judges, to run our armed forces”) and against DREAM (“The American people believe our borders are broken. It is a fundamental duty of our government to know who is entering the country, making illegal entry nearly impossible. In the coming Congress, we have an overwhelming bipartisan consensus to restore confidence in the security of our borders — before we pursue other immigration proposals,”)
Socially moderate. Fiscally conservative. Thoughtful. Wow. Kirk isn’t the only one in the bunch with an open mind. Senator Graham opposed DADT and DREAM but drew the ire of virtually everyone in the party when he and Senator Lieberman teamed up with the White House to see if they couldn’t create a workable energy bill (Harry Reid killed it). Senator Lugar didn’t join the team for DADT or DREAM but is the President’s go to senator on START. Senator Murkowski lives to stick it to Palin, so she scores moderate points for that. Senator Brown has showed an ability to tip-toe the line between the parties as deftly as anyone.
What does this all mean? First, it means that RINOs like myself can rest easier knowing that there is a group in the Senate to check the Palinites’ crazier tendencies. But more importantly, it means that the President has no excuse for not getting Republican support in the Senate. There are, at the very least, ten Senators that are open to crossing the party line. If the President can’t get six of them on every single piece of legislation that he attempts to pass, it means that he isn’t trying.
Follow Jeb at twitter: @JGolinkin
balconesfault // Dec 20, 2010 at 1:54 pm
Obama said this weekend that he supported the tax rate compromise to avert an economic catastrophe, not to show he could get things done.
Interesting. Obama came into office intent on averting an economic catastrophe caused by the misguided economic policies of the Bush Administration.
Your point? Given that it took Bush 8 years to fully trash the economy, it’s going to take more than a couple years to get us out of the rut.
Now Obama and Larry Summers both say they are averting an economic catastrophe by continuing the misguided economic policies of the Bush Administration.
Well, everyone pretty much knows that the high end tax cuts and estate tax cuts are just deficit increasing payoffs to the GOP to be able to do the other things that needed doing. It would have been nice if by now the middle class tax cuts could expire and return to a long-term sustainable level, but it’s dangerous to the demand side of our economy right now to start taking an extra 3K from the average middle class taxpayer. If unemployment were down around 5%, the deficit would be more a concern.
And the extension of unemployment benefits is not a part of the misguided economic policies of the Bush Administration. It’s a band-aid remedy for the consequences of them.
cdorsen // Dec 20, 2010 at 2:50 pm
Moderate and thoughtful is one thing, but Dem with an R by your name is another. Pragmatism is one thing, selling out your values is another. Working with the other side is one thing, stiffing the voters that put you in office to block the extremes of the other side is quite another as well. The GOP is supposed to be the party of the right. Self-called moderates may want it to be more center right, but please keep in mind there is and should be a difference in center right and center left….
lessadoabouteverything // Dec 20, 2010 at 3:14 pm
freesmith is a redstate troll, best to ignore him and his wacky definitions. Socially liberal Clinton’s balanced budgets were fiscally irresponsible, but social conservative Bush’s huge deficits were fiscally responsible because….Mark Steyn said so.
practical girl, actually I do not think you can say Republicans were as obstructionistic as you imagine, with the ACA they were but there were a number of pieces of legislation that had high bi partisan support.
If Obama does pass Start during the recess then what really is left of the obama agenda? Immigration and climate change, that is it. Most of the rest, national security, education, etc. he should be able to work with Republicans being that on these matters he is essentially already a Republican.
think4yourself // Dec 20, 2010 at 3:18 pm
“Self-called moderates may want it to be more center right, but please keep in mind there is and should be a difference in center right and center left….”
You have defined moderate as Center Right – why? I think that the political parties themselves are source of much of our problems – This from George Washington’s farewell address:
“The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism…the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.”
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washing.asp
I’m not suggesting selling out my values. I would suggest that in the desire to have one’s party beat the other party decisions are made not for value reasons but for political reasons (Does Jon Kyle really think that New Start hasn’t had enough time – or does he want to drag out the clock until the next Congressional session? Did Harry Reid really want the Dream Act to come to a vote and fail or did he want to show his Latino constituents in Nevada that gave him the win that he was doing all he could for them?).
lessadoabouteverything // Dec 20, 2010 at 3:22 pm
cdorsen, there are a host of areas where center left or center right do not apply as being distinct. The center left and center right are more likely to support our war in Afghanistan with the far right (the libertarians) and far left being opposed.
on a host of issues I can see where there is and should be no difference in center right and center left….
national security, defense, immigration (remember it was Bush who pushed the issue), education (Bush worked with Kennedy on NCLB)
Look, I get your point that on some issues the distinctions between Dem. and Republican should be clear just that there are many issues they need not be, where the center left and center right are the middle party.
Freesmith // Dec 20, 2010 at 3:32 pm
think4yourself
Please continue to split your ticket when you vote. I highly recommend that you do that.
Remember the famous political maxim: In division there is strength.
think4yourself // Dec 20, 2010 at 4:07 pm
Not a problem, I always plan to vote for the best person for the job – not the best political hack.
Freesmith // Dec 20, 2010 at 4:57 pm
Great!
Please encourage all your Democrat friends to do the same, especially those who are black.
They haven’t seen the wisdom of your point of view yet.
balconesfault // Dec 20, 2010 at 5:39 pm
Please encourage all your Democrat friends to do the same, especially those who are black.
I’m happy to encourage Dem friends to vote for the best candidate. I’d even be happy if on occasion an exceptional candidate came forward with an (R) next to his name. Unfortunately, here in Texas, the GOP Primaries generally preclude that from being the case.
lessadoabouteverything // Dec 20, 2010 at 7:47 pm
balcone, obviously freesmith has never heard of NYC which has had a non Democratic mayor for decades now, yet has Democrat registration majority of 5 to 1. But what can you expect from a troll.
Freesmith // Dec 20, 2010 at 10:45 pm
Right. Michael Rubens Bloomberg is Republican…no, an Independent…no, a “No Labels.” Whatever. He’s a member of the Bloomberg Party and nothing more.
Mayor John Vliet Lindsay was a Republican too, until he ran for re-election in 1969 as a Liberal and then ran for President in 1972 – as a Democrat.
Yep, lessadoabouteverything, I never heard of New York City.
lessadoabouteverything // Dec 20, 2010 at 11:07 pm
freesmith, having difficulty with reading comprehension? Notice this: NYC which has had a non Democratic mayor for decades now. Meaning millions of Democrats, including who knows how many blacks, voted for a non-Democrat.
And now notice what you wrote: Please continue to split your ticket when you vote.
You are aware that not voting for a Democrat constitutes as splitting your ticket, right? And Bloomberg ran as a Republican at first.
The point is that there are plenty of people who choose to vote regardless of party label. Believe it or not, there are many sane Republicans, sadly though the lunatic tea bagger fringe has driven them to the shadow, but nationally Republicans have never nominated a nutjob for President and I don’t see them doing it anytime soon so I hope next year some sanity will return to the Republican party as they gear up for the 2012 elections.