• Cover Story
• Table of
  Contents
• Contents By
  Topic
• Columns
  • Brownstein
  • Cook
  • Crook
  • Powers
  • Rauch
  • Stokes
  • Schneider
  • Taylor Jr.
• Regular
  Features
  • Hotline Extra
  • Inside Washington
  • Insiders Poll
  • K Street Corridor
  • People
  • The Week on the Hill

As lawmakers headed to the July Fourth recess, two recent accomplishments offered a positive bit of deja vu for Republicans: Their party was largely unified as they helped President Bush to achieve significant policy goals on Iraq war funding and on terrorist surveillance practices, while Democrats were badly divided, even among their leaders.

No, Tom DeLay and the GOP majorities have not returned to Capitol Hill. And, despite those two recent successes, Republicans are continuing their painful adjustment to what could be extended time in the minority. But in seizing upon what likely will be among the last gasps of Bush's influence, GOP members did show patience and persistence by insisting on their agenda and legislative skill by cutting final deals that limited the Democrats' imprint.

House Minority Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo., who was instrumental in crafting the final agreement overhauling the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, touted it as "a bipartisan compromise where all [sides] could be protected." In particular, he praised the cooperation of House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md. "We have discussed this at least three times a week since February," Blunt said.

Although Hoyer likewise said that the outcome on the FISA legislation "struck the right balance," House Democrats on June 20 voted against the measure 105-128. Liberal foes cited the legislation's threats to civil liberties. Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., backed the FISA deal, but she hardly gushed with enthusiasm. "I could argue it either way," she told reporters before the vote. "It's an improvement over the Senate bill."

On both FISA and the supplemental war spending bill that the House passed the previous day, both parties felt some relief that they had cleared the decks of most high-priority legislation and could move openly into the feverish election campaign. The appropriations measure includes $162 billion in war funding sought by Bush, but none of the strict conditions on U.S. military operations or the Iraqi government that many Democrats wanted. Ultimately, the Democrats decided it was best to avoid a veto and move on.

Pelosi and nearly two-thirds of House Democrats opposed the war funding, while Hoyer and the two other top Democratic leaders favored it. Democrats could claim credit, however, for tacking domestic goodies onto the supplemental, including a boost in education benefits for military veterans and an extension of unemployment compensation funds, although not as sweeping a program as the House and Senate had approved earlier this month.

"We avoided tax increases and were able to hold down domestic spending," said Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., the chief deputy minority whip, who was among the three Democrats and three Republicans who participated in the final House negotiations on the spending package on June 18.

In a sense, Democrats could afford to be magnanimous because they kept the few legislative trains moving, and without engaging a lame-duck opposition president in yet another fruitless veto showdown.

Republicans, though, were clearly feeling that they got the better end of the bargain on both major bills. They concede that those successes will likely not have much electoral impact; a similar GOP victory on a war-funding bill last spring yielded little political benefit. But the deals provided additional momentum for Republicans at a time when they think they are gaining traction on another issue that is highly important to voters: rising gasoline prices.

"We have taken care of important national priorities, and a majority of our members are comfortable with this," said a top aide to House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio. "Now they can pivot back to our preferred issue of gas prices, which favors Republicans on both the policy and politics. Our members feel this is the game-changer that we have been waiting for--and the issue that real Americans talk about at the dinner table with growing rage and on which they see Congress as the obstacle."

For their part, Democrats continued to dismiss GOP warnings that high gas prices will adversely affect their side. "American consumers are bearing the burden of the Bush-Cheney energy policies and 12 years in which the congressional Republican majority did nothing on energy. At the end of the day, this issue is a loser for Republicans," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., who chairs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. In addition, Hoyer cited congressional Democrats' nearly 20-point advantage in national generic polling as evidence of the GOP's dire predicament.

The more upbeat attitude among previously glum House Republicans is a distinct improvement from earlier this year, when they lost longtime GOP-held seats in three special elections.

Months ago, Republicans abandoned serious hope of gaining House seats in November--let alone recapturing the chamber that Democrats now control 236-199--especially given that more than two dozen GOP members are leaving their seats open by retiring or running for other office. Although Republicans continue to be pessimistic about their overall election prospects, they are now looking to at least limit their losses, which many close observers believe will be in the double digits.

Boehner conceded that House Republicans face "an uphill fight" and a huge financial disadvantage heading into November, but declared, "We will do better than a lot of people expect." In the Senate, too, Republicans hope to contain their election losses and keep Democrats from getting close to the 60 seats that would allow them to break GOP filibusters.

The congressional Republicans' strategy of limiting the size of the Democratic majorities in 2009 could curb the influence of Democrat Barack Obama if he wins the presidency. Or, it could strengthen the leverage of presumptive GOP presidential nominee John McCain if he is elected.

Lurking under the surface in discussions among House GOP insiders is another intriguing aspect of the current unstable political landscape: the prospect of a leadership overhaul, especially if Republicans suffer a second-consecutive campaign disaster.

Many Republicans expect that Boehner or Blunt, or both, could face challenges from younger blood in the House GOP--most likely either Cantor or Republican Conference Chairman Adam Putnam of Florida. Boehner and Blunt, both 58, ran against each other in a February 2006 contest to replace DeLay as majority leader, while Cantor, 45, and Putnam, 33, are widely viewed as the party's rising stars. Interestingly, the four have worked together closely on leadership priorities during the past 18 months and often speak positively of one another.

Cantor has been viewed as the heir apparent for whip ever since he twice prepared to run for an expected vacancy that did not materialize. In an April interview, Cantor--who has also been a prominent supporter of and fundraiser for McCain--would not confirm persistent media speculation that he expects to seek the whip post for the next Congress, regardless of Blunt's plans.

A well-connected GOP lobbyist said recently that Cantor and Putnam have a "tacit agreement" not to run against each other, and that Cantor would get the initial shot at moving up the leadership ladder "because he got there first." Responding through an aide, Putnam denied that he had made such an agreement. Each was first elected to the House in 2000 after serving as a state legislator and they became friends, in part as young allies of then-Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill.

If House Republicans fare especially badly in November, Boehner could also be on the spot. Other prospective insurgents include Reps. Jeb Hensarling of Texas and Mike Pence of Indiana, who have been leaders of the Republican Study Committee, a conservative group that says it has more than 110 members. At the start of this Congress, Pence ran against Boehner, and Rep. John Shadegg, R-Ariz., another former RSC leader, challenged Blunt, but neither contest was close.

In recent years, House Republicans have typically met to organize for the new Congress only a few days after the November election, which leaves little time for prospective challengers to launch bids. Such timing spawns pre-election machinations and rampant speculation, even though party leaders warn that leadership-race intrigue can distract members from focusing on more-immediate political priorities.

One other factor is worth keeping in mind: In contrast with Democrats, rank-and-file House Republicans historically have been more willing to launch challenges against their party establishment, and they have often succeeded--especially after a dismal election performance. In these cold-blooded contests, there is little room for sentiment or appreciation for past legislative accomplishments.