By W. James Antle, III on 11.18.08 @ 6:09AM
Dan Lungren challenges John Boehner for the top House Republican
leadership position.
When Dan Lungren began his first stint as a congressman in 1979,
it wasn't easy to be a Republican in Washington. Democrats held
the White House and both houses of Congress. Republicans were
"exhausted and bereft of ideas." There was no Ronald Reagan, but
plenty of deal-making GOP incumbents who were just happy to be in
Congress. Government was growing and the economy was racked by
stagflation.
Back then, Lungren joined with other conservative upstarts like
Newt Gingrich, Jack Kemp, Vin Weber, Trent Lott, and Bob Walker
to change the way Republicans did business. Over time, they
supplied an alternative to the Democratic agenda and came to
replace the GOP establishment's ossified leadership. But things
are starting to look a lot like they did in 1979. So Lungren, who
returned to Congress after a 16-year absence in 2005, is ready
once again to take on both the Democrats and the "coalition of
the comfortable" within his own party.
The Californian is going to start by challenging House Minority
Leader John Boehner. After "two successive election losses" that
have cost House Republicans 50 seats, with Boehner at the helm of
both debacles, Lungren argues it is time for a change. He
complains that Joe the Plumber did a better job articulating the
Republican economic message than the GOP congressional
leadership, the party's presidential standard-bearer or the
Republican National Committee. "In some ways," Lungren contends,
"we have become those who we have fought before."
Boehner shouldn't shoulder all -- or even most -- of the blame
for the Republicans' woes. But he declined to come up with any
real strategy for retaking the majority and has certainly
promoted his share of the big-government conservatism that has
blurred distinctions with the Democrats. He voted for the
Medicare prescription drug benefit, adding trillions to the
federal government's unfunded liabilities and saddling taxpayers
with the biggest entitlement program since LBJ's Great Society.
Worse, he was a
sponsor of No Child Left Behind and has since touted its
record increases in federal education spending.
This new largesse was supposed to buy Republicans the loyalty of
senior citizens and centrist suburbanites worried about the
public schools. But the Democrats insisted that neither program
went far enough and whatever boost they provided Republicans
among these voting blocs proved short-lived. Come January 20,
2009, Barack Obama's party will control the elected branches of
the federal government.
LUNGREN HAS EXPERIENCE with a different approach. A founding
member of the Conservative Opportunity Society in the 1980s, he
says his colleagues learned from the Vietnam-era antiwar movement
that "if you define the debate, you define the agenda." He
pressed for reduced taxes, restrained spending, and the Reagan
defense buildup in the House. As California's tough-on-crime
attorney general for two terms in the 1990s, he championed
Megan's Law, three-strikes-and-you're-out, and the state's Safe
Schools Plan. He was crushed in the 1998 gubernatorial race, but
six years later he came back to the House and compiled a
staunchly conservative voting record.
Yet Lungren's late, long-shot bid is not without problems. While
he has a keen memory of what Gingrich and company did to
revitalize a dispirited Republican minority, he is vague about
how he would apply those lessons today. Lungren spoke to a
teleconference of bloggers about the way Republicans utilized
C-SPAN back in the '80s, but his announcement of the conference
call -- his team
mistakenly labeled it a "bloggers' row" -- demonstrated a
certain haziness with today's cutting-edge media outreach.
Lungren, who is keeping the race a gentlemanly affair, also lacks
a clear issue like George H.W. Bush's 1990 tax increase with
which to differentiate himself from the current leadership.
Boehner called the $700 billion Wall Street bailout a "crap
sandwich" but urged Republicans to eat it anyway. Lungren was one
of the happy diners, who still defends it as a "financial rescue"
and is critical only of the way Republicans talked about the
vote. Lungren is an eloquent opponent of the automobile industry
bailout, but when a reporter
repeatedly asked him how the first bailout would complicate the
case against the second he could only argue that what Republican
leaders did "was not precedential."
While Boehner was passing No Child Left Behind, Lungren wasn't in
Congress. He was back in California while Boehner was voting for
the Medicare prescription drug benefit. (Lungren's spokesman said
he would get back to me on both of these issues.) While Lungren's
position on earmarks is sensible -- he favors transparency and
opposes earmarks that don't have a legitimate federal purpose --
it isn't noticeably to the right of Boehner's.
Instead Lungren emphasizes messaging and procedural differences
with the current leader. He wants to "throw out the regular rules
and have at least three hours devoted to debate about who the
next leader should be." He is critical of Republicans for trying
to co-opt the Democrats -- and the makers of the antidepressant
Effexor -- by adopting the "Change You Deserve" slogan. Both are
perfectly reasonable stances, but neither seems like much of a
rallying cry for the right.
Nevertheless, Lungren can still make this case: He was in
Congress when conservatives led the Republicans out of the
wilderness. Boehner has presided over their return to minority
status. The argument against rewarding failure didn't take after
the 2006 elections, when Boehner crushed Mike Pence 168 to 27
(with one of those Boehner votes coming from Lungren). It may not
prevail this time, since there is no guarantee Lungren will have
even Pence's vote.
But eventually, some Republican somewhere in the conference will
grow tired of losing. That Republican will end up backing
Lungren's challenge to the existing leadership -- or mounting the
next one.
topics:
John Boehner, Conservatism, Republican Party