Post-Gazette Editorial – 11/28/06

This page was last updated on November 28, 2006.

Out with the old: The Republican Congress leaves plenty undone; Editorial; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; November 28, 2006.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“This year’s midterm elections were all about the Congress. The outgoing, Republican-led majority will soon give way to a new House and Senate where the Democrats are in charge.

“The members of the expiring Republican leadership, rejected at the polls three weeks ago, could legitimately be resentful and even somewhat careless about the time remaining during this term, now scheduled to end no later than Dec. 16. Although most of them will be returning in the new Congress, they will no longer serve in a majority role.”

[RWC] I don’t care what party an elected representative belongs to; no one should “be resentful and even somewhat careless about the time remaining during this term.” Anyone who would behave like this proves they deserved to be canned.

“Anyone who has ever had to hand over leadership to a rival knows that at least two emotions conflict at that point. One says, ‘They will see the price of getting rid of me, they’ll see how much worse things will be under my successor’ -- in this case the Democrats.

“The more constructive approach is to leave a tidy, smooth-running operation behind. In the case of the Congress, this can leave a good taste in the voters’ mouths and perhaps, down the road, even a touch of nostalgia for the old Republican gang, who, of course, will be seeking to make a comeback as early as 2008.

“So far, this outgoing Congress is behaving badly. Far and away its most irresponsible act is not to deal with the nine remaining appropriations bills to cover government spending for the fiscal year which began two months ago. The amount is about $500 billion. Passing these bills is one of the most fundamental tasks of any U.S. Congress.”

[RWC] If these bills are handled before the term ends, does anyone care to bet we’d see an editorial saying a lame duck Congress should not have acted because voters voted for change?

“President Bush’s Republicans also dealt him a bad hand to play at the Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation conference he recently attended in Vietnam. Just before his departure, Congress withdrew a trade bill that favored Vietnam, robbing him of a key gift to deliver to his hosts.”

[RWC] I know nothing about the trade bill so my comment has nothing to do with it being a good idea or not.

If Congress had passed the bill, how much would you bet we’d see an editorial about a rubberstamp Congress?

“It could be that the outgoing Congress imagines it can do what it likes now, on the assumption that all will be forgotten in the smoke and dust of the upcoming presidential campaign. But that is unlikely.

“Americans showed their disgust at such do-nothing congressional ways at the polls this year. The voters’ critical eye and readiness for change will certainly not go away in 2008.”

[RWC] While as the majority party Republicans must accept most responsibility if the “do-nothing” label is correct, Democrats must accept some responsibility as well. Remember, Republicans had very small majorities. As a result, Republicans couldn’t simply do what they wanted.