The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Politics
Print Email
Text Size

Politics

Contract Negotiations

By from the September 2010 issue

Tomorrow, House Republicans are set to release their “governing agenda” — a Contract with America that is more than just a campaign tool, drawing as it does on 30 years of history.

When Obama, Reid, and Pelosi took combined power in January 2009, many Americans feared that they would maintain one-party rule of Congress and the presidency for many years.

As 2009 progressed, however, Americans reacted quickly and negatively to the massive government spending and debt involved in the repeated bailouts and stimulus bills, and the plans to have the government take over health care, energy, banks, the Internet, and other targets of opportunity. As the Democrats’ vague campaign slogans were turned into thousand-page assaults on America’s most traditional value, liberty, the Democrats’ programs became less popular and Democratic politicians themselves, from Reid to Obama, faded in the polls.

Before the year ended, Republicans began privately to wonder, then hope, then whisper that perhaps their time in the wilderness could be shorter than the 40 years from 1955 to 1995 when House Republicans were consigned to minority status, or the shorter 12 years from 1995 to 2007 when Democrats were out of power in the House. Might Republicans win a majority in the House after only four years in exile?

And from talk radio to the Tea Party activists to the Republican leadership in the House, there emerged one consensus: we need another “Contract with America.” What would it say? Who would write it? Bottom up or top down? These questions swirled around the collective decision that a meaningful victory in November 2010 required a document linking Republican candidates, a majority of Americans, and a concrete list of political convictions, principles, and actual commitments to take action.

Another Contract with America? While there is widespread agreement-in fact a public demand for such a document-it is an interesting question why. There was a contract in 1994, 16 years ago. It was not repeated in 1996. There was no demand for a contract, nor one offered for the next seven election cycles. Why now? Why do so many Republicans and center-right independents, Perot voters, and Tea Party activists view the Contract as important and worthwhile, both looking back to 1994 and forward to 2010?

The story of the Contract with America begins not in 1994, but in 1980. In his book, The Enduring Revolution: How the Contract with America Continues to Shape the Nation, Fox News reporter Major Garrett describes a private citizen suggesting to then RNC chairman Bill Brock that there should be a joint event with Republican presidential candidate Reagan and all the House and Senate candidates running that year. Brock enlisted a freshman House member from Georgia, Newt Gingrich, who was (already) the chairman of the long-range planning committee for the National Republican Congressional Committee. (Any bets on whether there was a long-range planning committee before Newt showed up in Washington?)

There was some drama as Gingrich initially canceled the joint event — because the Reagan campaign staff appeared to want a photo opportunity without a joint statement on policy. But finally, on September 15, the event did come off, as Ronald Reagan and more than 150 Republican candidates for the House and Senate gathered on the Capitol steps and jointly committed to a “statement of pledges”: First,

Substantial cuts in the money that Congress spends on itself. Second: Selective cuts in Government spending to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse, and to fight inflation. Third: Across-the-board cuts in individual income taxes and increased incentives for savings, investment and capital recovery. Fourth: All-out efforts to encourage more private investment and more permanent jobs, especially in the central cities. Fifth: Stepped-up military efforts to make the nation’s foreign policy credible and to secure peace and stability in the world.

Party platforms are wish lists. This was a “to do” list, endorsed not by party activists in a conference room but by the very candidates for office who could be held responsible for making things happen. Here was Reagan’s agenda becoming the Republican agenda through the candidates themselves. In his Washington Post column published on September 10, David Broder was alone in noticing that something very different had just happened. “The ‘contract’ Reagan and the Republicans are offering,” he wrote, “…represents a serious and healthy departure from the norms of contemporary presidential campaigning.”

Fifty-five days later, Reagan won the presidency and Republicans gained 33 House seats and 12 Senate seats (six of the victors were at the event), winning control of the Senate for the first time since 1955. Broder reported that the “junior House Republicans…concocted the notion and sold it to a somewhat reluctant Reagan campaign.” This was the beginning of the Party of Lincoln becoming the Reagan Republican party…and the then-few Reaganites in Congress organized this beginning of the long march through the institutions of the Republican Party.

When Reagan won it was credible for his party to insist that they had not simply defeated a failed president Jimmy Carter, but rather had won a clear mandate on the five issues publicly endorsed at the Capitol steps event September 15.

THE CONTRACT WITH AMERICA OF 1994 began to come together in 1993 when staffers for Gingrich and Rep. Dick Armey started to flesh out a Republican alternative to Bill Clinton. Yes, they agreed, the first and necessary step was opposition, but backbenchers like Ohio’s John Kasich argued successfully that the Republicans should draft and force votes on their own budget to compete with and offer a contrast to the one the Democrats would enact. Armey, with his chief of staff Kerry Knott and press secretary Ed Gillespie, took the lead in creating the Contract, first compiling the list of issues and then assigning the hard work of putting pleasant-sounding ideas into real world legislative language. The resulting 10 legislative proposals, such as welfare reform and cutting the capital gains tax, totaled 140 pages of legislative text. There were also eight congressional reforms such as a House rule requiring a three-fifths vote to raise taxes.

RNC chairman Haley Barbour, now the governor of Mississippi, strongly supported the Contract, devoting an office at RNC headquarters to promoting it and paying for the $700,000 full page ad in the TV Guide, the largest circulation magazine at the time. The ad was perforated and urged voters to tear it out and “keep this page to hold us accountable.” It had little boxes to check off as each part of the Contract was voted on. The bottom line read, “If we break this contract, throw us out. We mean it.”

The Contract promised that if they won a majority in the House, Republicans would hold up-or-down votes on its 10 items within 100 days. The establishment press “rewrote” the Contract after the election, telling the world that the Republicans had promised to pass all 10 bills through the House and Senate. This was done to set up the new Gingrich House for failure, but instead put pressure on Senate Republicans who had refused to participate in the Contract. When Republican senators returned home to their first congressional recess, they learned that their constituents expected them to enact the Contract.

Most of the Contract was not only voted on in the House within the first 100 days, but enacted by the Senate as well, with perhaps 60 percent of it becoming law. The two big items that did not completely pass were the two constitutional amendments — a balanced budget amendment and term limits on congressmen. The balanced budget did win the two-thirds of the votes required in the House, but could not garner two-thirds in the Senate. Term limits could not get enough Democratic votes to win the supermajority needed, but Republicans changed the House rules to term limit all committee chairs, which had a dramatic effect in culling out the old bulls over time.

Page: 1 2 3  

About the Author

Grover G. Norquist is the president of Americans for Tax Reform. 

Letter to the Editor View all comments (48) |

Siegfried X| 9.22.10 @ 6:55AM

The Rise, Decline, Fall, and (hopefully) Rebirth of the 1994 Reagan Republican congress.

I've been thinking a lot about this lately. This article is superb.

I was beginning to fear that Reagan conservatism was dead forever. I hope it is really reborn with next year's Republican House.

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.22.10 @ 7:57AM

Siegfried,
Agreed! Superb column. Pray earnestly for our Soddom on the Beltway.
I think it is America's last chance to avoid something truly horrible.

Al Adab| 9.22.10 @ 12:43PM

"Lets grow up Conservatives. If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let's get to work." Barry Goldwater at the 1960 (yes 1960!) Republican convention. Someday is today. Let's get to work!

Tim*| 9.22.10 @ 7:07AM

Tea Party :
The Contract from America

September 16, 2010

We, the citizens of the United States of America, call upon those seeking to represent us in public office to sign the Contract from America and by doing so commit to support each of its agenda items and advocate on behalf of individual liberty, limited government, and economic freedom.

1. Protect the Constitution
2. Reject Cap & Trade
3. Demand a Balanced Budget
4. Enact Fundamental Tax Reform
5. Restore Fiscal Responsibility & Constitutionally Limited Government
6. End Runaway Government Spending
7. Defund, Repeal, & Replace Government-run Health Care
8. Pass an ‘All-of-the-Above” Energy Policy
9. Stop the Pork
10. Stop the Tax Hikes

http://www.thecontract.org/

canuckistani| 9.22.10 @ 4:49PM

As usual you try to dumb down the most complex issues into a billboard, or better yet, a punchline.
What is "fundamental Tax reform"? Is it taxing wealth and work at the same rates? Is it taxing winfall profits of companies that downsize to pad their earnings? Is it eliminating loopholes for employers and individuals that move wealth and jobs overseas? Is it ending tax subsidies for dead industries?
It should be all of it, and more.
#7, does that include Medicare? What about old provisions that require a hospital to treat the uninsured? That too?

Sapient| 9.23.10 @ 1:03PM

I'm with you canuckistani

Personally, though I am 60 years old, I want a piece of the NFL and NBA players...talk about windfall profits for just being tall or big or fast....and then they get publicly provided stadiums. Lets start there, and Hollywood.

One thing for sure...there is a dumbing down going on....the problem is those who have worked all our lives know better than believe some of the greed and envy based statements you put forth.

As the saying goes, "I would agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong."

Achilles Toejam| 9.25.10 @ 12:36AM

Tax reform? Repeal the 16th amendment adopted a flat or fair tax system. Repeal NAFTA and remove incentives for companies to go to places like Mexico or other countries that pay their workers slave labor wages forcing loyal American companies to try to compete.

Layne S| 9.22.10 @ 7:56PM

Love it! I don't understand why the Repubs went and created the NOT user-friendly American Speaking Out when this Contract had already been created / debated / voted / presented. I guess it was a case of "not created by us".

Achilles Toejam| 9.25.10 @ 12:32AM

I'm not seeing anything about term limits, why not?

Sam| 9.22.10 @ 8:46AM

There's been so much energy focused on the political changes needed, discussion of actions expected of newly elected conservative or GOP Congressmen and Senators. I submit that it is not acceptable to merely slow the march of socialism. Rather, the next Congress needs to dismantle the failed policies - both the socialization of activities that are better private and the centralization of activities that are better local. Others have laid out principles, but I think we need to debate specifics. Excepting our outstanding armed forces, I cannot think of one Cabinet dept that deserves all our tax dollars that devour.

In the real world, failures would be cancelled/eliminated. In govt, they are renamed and get an increase of my hard-earned tax dollars.

My top 10 targets for elimination or 50+% reductions:

Energy dept. (Energy independent yet?)
Education dept. (RRR gone. Anti-American)
EPA (from anti-litter campaign to this?)
TSA (privatize)

Commerce dept (cut 50% - figure out the mission)
State Dept (cut 50% and staff with Americans)
Interior Dept (cut 50% and focus)
Obamacare (repeal)
Labor Dept (union shills)
Transportation dept (HS Rail to nowhere)

My $.02

Sam

Tim*| 9.22.10 @ 9:05AM

Americans may finally get Real about specific spending cuts , with everything on the table open to discussion and debate , including defense waste , social security , medicare , on down ?

rainmaker1145 | 9.22.10 @ 9:20AM

It's not really a contract - the principles are very much like the Ten Commandments:

1. They come from our overlords.
2. They will follow them when it is convenient, but we will be required to follow them always.
3. They will interpret the terms as they see fit.
4. They have no accountability in the contract (in this life).
5. They will continue to act just like the liberals, they will just feel worse than the liberals do about it.

It's just more crap from the corrupt, establishment Republicans who are looking to mollify the Tea Parties so they can keep their seats.

Got a news flash for you. We will be running candidates against you in 2012. It's already too late.

Len| 9.22.10 @ 9:37AM

The Contract with America was a joke. It had no substantive provisions for actually abiding within the limits of the US constitution. In effect it said we're still going to ignore the limits of our offices and authority, but we'll keep the violations and usurpations to ___ amount.

Most Repugs are clueless about the actual clauses of the US constitution, and I'm talking about the ones that actually care, not those Rockefeller repugs that just don't care at all. I've read some of the proposals put forward by folks like Ryan and I see no real effort at returning to federalism where the federal government is the servant of the states and legislates only in those areas concerning common defense and trade, and the rest (with some minor, very minor exceptions) belongs to the states.

Siegfried X| 9.22.10 @ 4:29PM

"Most Repugs "

That's a dead give away. Only left-wingers say "Repugs" (and "tea bagger").

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.22.10 @ 12:12PM

Hey, Len.
Bitch Bitch Bitch.

You have never had much responsibility have you?

Sir, a ship big enough to hold three hundred MILLION people, takes a little while to change course.
Please, keep pushing the wheel right while you re-load your magazines.
God bless

Len| 9.22.10 @ 1:30PM

Ken, I see it more as being that piece of sand in the oyster that so irritates it until it secretes the material that forms a pearl. I certainly have no expectations that even given 20 years that we could undo what has taken generation after generation to build up, but that doesn't mean I'm going to settle for what is done.

Some will look at the US and say "see we're better than other countries", but I say "see this is the standard (US constitution, Declaration of Independence [better], justice, liberty, etc.) and we need to stop patting ourselves on the back when we are so far away.

Sure I'm glad to see some of the establishment in the GOP being displaced, but there are still too many Boehners and Grahams, and not enough Pauls and DeMints for my taste.

tatosian| 9.22.10 @ 12:34PM

Norquist's support of the ground zero mosque-- "“Sikhs, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Jews, Mormons, all have to wonder if some politicians are deciding that their First Amendment rights are subject to political winds." ( washington wire. Aug. 18, 2010) )
Norquist and convicted terrorist supporting Abdurahman Alamoudi -- ( http://archive.frontpagemag.co.....RTID=15084 ) and ABDURAHMAN ALAMOUDI SENTENCED TO JAIL IN TERRORISM FINANCING CASE-- ( DOJ, FRIDAY, OCTOBER 15, 2004 )
Khan job. " It is hard fully to calculate the magnitude of the damage done by the pro-Islamist influence operation run by Grover Norquist and his friends." Frank Gaffney ( http://archive.frontpagemag.co.....x?ARTID=63 )
Don't be troubled republicans, you're in good hands....

Senor Mick| 9.22.10 @ 12:57PM

Mes amigos,

I confess that I am not very impressed by this. Len's (above) point has its merits. The 1994 Contract was not a legally binding document, just a bunch of principles and neat-sounding ideas.

I often feel that we are bunch of powerless losers who in the pre-IT days would have been furiously writing useless letters to the editor. I can imagine us sitting in our chairs, sealed envelope in hand, hands clasped contentedly, thinking, "This'll show them!"

The nature of Big Government is itself. I buy gold and TIPs and find it hard to muster any enthusiasm for the East Coast Hollywood of Washington DC, where everone lives in a glass house with mirrored walls and think, like most actors, that their playacting is Real Life.

Please help me.

Well, it doesn't show anyone anything.

RCV| 9.22.10 @ 2:47PM

Whatever hopes the Tea Party had as an independent movement are dead. Now that the candidates they backed have won the official GOP nominations, the party machinery has moved in and will manage their campaigns from here on out. Then, if they're elected, they'll fall in line with the McConnell-Boehner marching orders.

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.22.10 @ 3:04PM

RCV,
I simply cannot for my life understand your position.
Are you somehow 'protected' from the poverty wave that is engulfing our country?

Are you somehow 'bullet proof' if our currency goes into hyper-inflation?

What is your secret, Sir?

Additionally, you live in a vulnerable area vis a vis terrorism. Do you have a secret to avoid that 'minor inconvenience'?

RCV| 9.22.10 @ 3:40PM

Wish I was, Ken. I suffer from all of those ills, just like you. Our only differences are (1) to what we attribute the state we presently find ourselves in; and (2) how do we get out of the mess.

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.22.10 @ 6:18PM

RCV
I do not worship the "Constitution" or the "Declaration of Independence" as an idol of a god.
Nevertheless,
they were pretty brilliant documents recognizing the fallen nature of mankind and as a bulwark against tyranny.
Today, we live under the tyranny of the government ...of the 'Greens' and of the 'warmers'.

I bought two cases of long-life incandescent bulbs last week. Heh, I like to read.

We need a (mini) nuke plant in every county. Six feet of dirt covers nuclear waste to less than the radiation of plain old granite rock.

Yes, RCV, I don't have all the answers, but if we could somehow get an honest discussion of the 'questions' going, that would be pretty cool. You are a bright guy:
One simple question: who should decide what kind of light-bulbs you should buy?
Another:
Whose decision should it be if you want to trade a hundred dollars a month in gasoline for a safer ride in your car?
Start lining up simple questions like that. Please.

RCV| 9.22.10 @ 10:35PM

Hey Ken: You're obviously a very bright guy yourself. (I'm glad you toned down the Texas Ranger bravado.)

There is much you and I agree on. First and foremost, the Declaration and the Constitution were among the most brilliant political constructs in history. Every year, I marvel at some new aspect of the political system they set up and wonder how that group of bright young men (Franklin excepted as to "young") could have managed to construct it with little or no precedent to work from. I also thank them, deeply and sincerely, for what they gave us.

I also agree with you on many smaller issues. Lightbulbs, for example. I love incandescents as well. Someday, somone is going to have to answer for encouraging, and now requiring, Americans to buy inferior bulbs filled with poisonous mercury.

On auto safety, I have a more charitable view toward regulation. We all pay for unsafe cars on the road, in higher car and health insurance rates as well as increased personal risk from other drivers and a myriad of other societal costs.

I also just can't agree for a second that we live under "tyranny" in any sense of that word. We live in the freest, most prosperous nation in history. When you look back to 1789, and realize how many of our fellow citizens have a say in the running of their government compared to then, not to mention the millions who are no longer owned by other humans, we have made great positive advances in many areas of human liberty.

We also live in a far more complex society than existed then, and there is a legitimate need for the kind of regulation that just wasn't necessary or desirable in 1789. If someone sold tainted eggs then, a handful of people in a village might get sick, and people would know pretty quickly who was responsible. Plus, people who sold eggs would know the people to whom they sold and would feel a personal responsibility for their actions. Today, an egg seller could cause thousands of illnesses or death. Increasing complexity just necessitates increasing societal guidelines and regulations.

But don't assume that there are two categories of political thought - left and right - and that everyone in those categories lines up on every issue.

I salute you, Ken, for your thoughtfulness and gentlemanliness. You are a man I can respect even when we disagree.

Tim*| 9.22.10 @ 3:25PM

We Tea Party Rebels don't allow ObamaBoy Apologists , such as LawBoy , to " Define " Us or Our Future .
Tea Party Candidate now in The Midterms have already purged RINO-CINO's from The Republican Party .
We , Tea Party Rebels know what LawBoy , apparently doesn't , That is that The GOP needs Us more than We need The GOP .

The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates .

Rise Up !

RCV| 9.22.10 @ 3:42PM

Keep telling yourself that, Timmie, as the GOP leadership announces the program and the newly-financed candidates fall in line. Your first "tea party" candidate, Scott Brown, didn't quite work out for you, did he?

Tim*| 9.22.10 @ 3:57PM

I will LawBoy , because We Tea Party Rebels just took The Republican Establishment to the cleaners with Our Votes and Our Moneybombs.

We notice that you ObamaBoy Apologists are over here fightin' a retreat rear guard action at AS , attempting to marginalize Us and utterly failing .
We also notice that Your Obama hasn't worked out with the voters ,who are falling off his sled , and that you're about to lose control of The House and in a dog fight to hold even The Senate .

The Tea Party Rebellion Escalates .

We Remember In November .

Siegfried X| 9.22.10 @ 4:30PM

BS. Everybody knew that Scott Brown was a RINO. We said it over and over again.

And actually he has turned out better than I expected. He did a great job in yesterday's goal line stand, stopping amnesty and don't ask, don't tell.

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.22.10 @ 2:54PM

Senor,
I can help you.

Buy .22 cartridges for barter instead of gold. With a .22 a man can feed his family. One cannot eat gold.
.22s also work well on IRS agents and other terrorists. (Grin)

jokemachine| 9.22.10 @ 3:29PM

To those who think it's hopeless and that politicians will always disregard the wishes of the people no matter what "contract" they agreed to: the fact that this is even on the table shows the power of the Tea Party movement. Do you seriously think people are going to go back to sleep when their candidates get elected? Do you honestly believe that we naively trust politicians will do what they say they are going to do? If they don't follow through they will be voted out PERIOD. We're not going away any time soon. The stakes are too high. The politicians may get hijacked, but as long as the people stay involved we can put it right.

Peppermint Tea | 9.22.10 @ 4:00PM

My 2 cents on five of the 10 points above
1. Protect the Constitution
By impeaching 4 supremes
By Repealing the 17th Amendment
By Repealing the Federal Reserve
By Repealing federal income tax
2. Reject Cap & Trade
Have the SCOTUS revisit their Mass ruling based on truthful science.
3. Demand a Balanced Budget
Beginning 2011. Not later. Can't wait for amendment.
4. Enact Fundamental Tax Reform
See repeal Fed income tax
5. Restore Fiscal Responsibility & Constitutionally Limited Government
See repeal fed income tax
Abolish Education, EPA, HUD, etc.
Work on SS buyout

Are we going to get serious? Leaving the same income tax structure will enable future congresses.

canuckistani| 9.22.10 @ 4:56PM

Ugh.

Siegfried X| 9.22.10 @ 5:38PM

To cut spending, Republicans say they are committed to canceling remaining expenditures from the 2009 stimulus law, return domestic appropriations to 2008 levels, impose "hard" budget caps on discretionary spending accounts, reduce spending for congressional operations, have weekly floor votes on winners of the "YouCut" program that allows citizens to vote online for programs that should be slashed, end the Troubled Asset Relief Program, end government control of the secondary home-mortgage lending giants Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, freeze federal hiring for non-security jobs, sunset programs after a certain number of years, and use more straightforward budgeting for entitlement programs.

Siegfried X| 9.22.10 @ 5:39PM

An election year agenda being unveiled by House Republicans Thursday will include language affirming the party's support of "traditional marriage" and its opposition to abortion rights

Pat| 9.22.10 @ 5:53PM

Maybe the Re-flublicans should try “Contact with America” instead of “Contract” to learn that few Americans believe anything will change – because the majority of us know nothing has. Just today, General Motors announced it is making campaign donations again. Why? Because they believe they have to buy off our politicians, both Democrats and Republicans, in return for favorable laws and political influence which helps GM and counters the UAW’s campaign contributions which also purchase favorable laws and political influence. Us Americans own GM, at least 61% according to the latest bookkeeping swindle, so we’re essentially contributing our own money, from our own company, without our consent to buy off those folks we pay to work for us within Washington and Michigan’s state government. This is insanity, but this is also very typical of America today.

So the Re-flublicans should ask us taxpayers if we believe anything will change simply because they’ve resurrected an old standby such as the “Contract with America” flim-flam – they might be surprised at our answer. We’re pretty sure of certain things though and we don’t need another “Contract” for additional confirmation. We're sure the politicians will raise the retail prices on future “graft” and “corruption”, we know the UAW will continue to contribute campaign funds to keep our tax dollars flowing to them and we also know that new Buick or Chevy will contain a generous amount of “domestic content” in the form of political payoffs.

Siegfried X| 9.22.10 @ 7:54PM

You Democrats will keep voting Democrat, that's for sure.

Siegfried X| 9.22.10 @ 7:57PM

A draft version of the entire "Pledge To America" is here:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20017335-503544.html

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.22.10 @ 8:08PM

RCV,
I copy paste this here to maybe catch your eye.

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.22.10 @ 6:18PM
RCV
I do not worship the "Constitution" or the "Declaration of Independence" as an idol of a god.
Nevertheless,
they were pretty brilliant documents recognizing the fallen nature of mankind and as a bulwark against tyranny.
Today, we live under the tyranny of the government ...of the 'Greens' and of the 'warmers'.

I bought two cases of long-life incandescent bulbs last week. Heh, I like to read.

We need a (mini) nuke plant in every county. Six feet of dirt covers nuclear waste to less than the radiation of plain old granite rock.

Yes, RCV, I don't have all the answers, but if we could somehow get an honest discussion of the 'questions' going, that would be pretty cool. You are a bright guy:
One simple question: who should decide what kind of light-bulbs you should buy?
Another:
Whose decision should it be if you want to trade a hundred dollars a month in gasoline for a safer ride in your car?
Start lining up simple questions like that. Please.

bluecollarbytes| 9.22.10 @ 9:37PM

I'm skeptical, but this is a good start. Obamacare will be repealed, not merely played with. We'll get back to Business, as usual, which in this country works best with minimal interference from nanny-statists.

The spending freeze idea should be assumed, If the next Republican majority is serious about it enough to follow through (any deviation from this point spells doom for the rest, imho)

Let's see if Republicans have the knuts to 'shrink govt'. I'm cautiously hopeful.

Siegfried X| 9.22.10 @ 9:56PM

The Pledge To America can be summarize as:

Roll everything back to when Bush left office,
plus add some procedural gimmicks.

There is very little in the Pledge outside of that.

aware| 9.23.10 @ 6:30AM

The "Pledge" is nothing but an insider window dressing job. I especially liked "...reform Fannie and Freddie". This alone should be enough to prove the Republicans don't have half a clue. If not, how about "....repeal and REPLACE healthcare". Read: our version of federal tyranny is better than theirs'.

"Reform"....mechanism by which politicians legalize then organize formally criminal activities.

Didn't see anything about actual cuts in spending, instead just a return to the wonderful days '08 and the Republican form of big government. 2/3s down the road to bankruptcy is so much better than 3/4s huh?

Siegfried X| 9.23.10 @ 8:23AM

The Pledge DOES removed Fannie and Freddie from government control. It DOES totally repeal ObamaCare. It cuts the budget 10%, then puts a hard freeze on it. Government jobs are frozen so it will shrink by attrition.

aware| 9.23.10 @ 4:57PM

10% ain't even a good start. Cut government 75% and taxes 50%. Its really that simple.
Saw one of your good posts at Amer. Con. Hats off!

Nothing is free of "government control", the damage with these two albatrosses is the result of government control BEFORE government "took" control(ownership). The corrupt banking system supported by the State assures continued, and growing, control even if they no longer "own" them.

Larrym| 9.23.10 @ 4:56PM

The Pledge is worthless.
It's an election year ploy; pure and simple. Politicians will say anything to get elected and the newcomers are no different than the old guard. If they have to shift their views to the center to win, they will do it. That's just the start of the lying.
Then the tea party candidates, if elected, will realize that they have no say in instituting legislation and consequentially will have to work with the old guard if they want to accomplish anything. Their base will become disillusioned and they will disappear into the woodwork.
Those who survive will find that most of their time will be consumed with raising money and they will have to cozy up to the lobbyists if they want to get reelected.
At that point they will finally realize that it's not the political parties or the people who get things done in this country, it's the money men.
It took the money people less than a year to figure out how they can cash in on the grass roots movements that sprang up. And as the general elections draw closer, they are poised to take their share.
Follow the money folks and you will see who is pulling the strings of power. It's a simple matter but most people are content to follow the diversions and each month there is a new one put out there to keep the rabble stirred up.
Keep in mind that when Eisenhower left office he retired to a farm in Gettysburg; a man of modest means. LBJ came into office a poor man and left rich. Agnew was disgraced for stealing and died a multi-millionaire. Carter was an exception to the rule. Palin was living on the financial edge a few years ago and now makes millions preaching to the choir. The list could go on, but you get the point.
Norquist is an infamous lobbyist who has made a fortune lobbying the same government he claims to want to reduce.
This pledge is the latest diversion for the media and the pundits and the bloggers. It's a chew toy for the masses.

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.23.10 @ 5:23PM

Larrym,
Screw you, you cynical bastard.

A lot of men died to allow your cynicism and free speech.

Larrym| 9.23.10 @ 5:52PM

Yeah, it''s true. And a lot of Mexicans were killed and had their land stolen so that you could have a state that shouldn't be a part of the USA.

More Articles by Grover G. Norquist

More Articles From Politics

Assessing a Week of Scandal

May 17, 2013 | Matt Purple

The Great Train Robbery

May 9, 2013 | John H. Fund

Term Limits Are Back

March 16, 2013 | John H. Fund

AmSpec Preview: 2013 State of the Union Address

February 12, 2013 | TAS Staff

Grits and Glitz

January 18, 2013 | Aram Bakshian, Jr.

http://spectator.org/archives/2010/09/22/contract-negotiations

ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Headlines

Not Ready for Primetime Players

Daniel J. Flynn|111 comments

Assessing a Week of Scandal

Matt Purple|124 comments

Oops, Maybe Government is Tyrannical

Marta H. Mossburg|61 comments

Soros Funds Anti-‘Torture’ Report

Mark Tooley|106 comments

Treasure State Treasury

Bill Croke|3 comments

My Generation’s Disease

Benjamin Brophy|68 comments

The View From the Other Side

George H. Wittman|17 comments

USPS: Radical Surgery Needed

Peter Hannaford|19 comments

The Spectacle Blog

Artur Davis Says Scandals Are Real

Quin Hillyer | 4:15PM

Good New Book: ‘Precipice’

Quin Hillyer | 3:07PM

The Spectator’s Spectacular: Most Read Stories, May 12-May 19

Patrick Ryan | 12:41PM

Elijah Harper, R.I.P.

Aaron Goldstein | 5.18.13

If Only the Tsar Knew!

F.H. Buckley | 5.18.13

Low-Level IRS Staffer: No, We Didn’t Mastermind This Entire Thing

Matt Purple | 5.17.13

UPDATED: IRS Acting Chief Apologizes, But Defends His Actions

Kaylin Bugos | 5.17.13

Voter Fraud Affected Election Results in Missouri

Kaylin Bugos | 5.17.13

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

My Generation’s Disease

Benjamin Brophy | 5.17.13

The Liberal Union Behind the IRS

Jeffrey Lord | 5.16.13

Not Ready for Primetime Players

Daniel J. Flynn | 5.17.13

Assessing a Week of Scandal

Matt Purple | 5.17.13

Oops, Maybe Government is Tyrannical

Marta H. Mossburg | 5.17.13

The View From the Other Side

George H. Wittman | 5.17.13

From Bimbos to Benghazi

Jeffrey Lord | 5.9.13

Soros Funds Anti-‘Torture’ Report

Mark Tooley | 5.17.13

ADVERTISEMENT

Home |About |Contributors |Advertise |Donate |Privacy Policy |Contact

The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.

Copyright 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.