Need to Know: House

Go Big and Go Home

One of the most legislatively successful sessions of Congress in modern history ends in historic losses for Democrats.

Susan Davis
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Susan Davis
Dec. 16, 2010, 12:23 p.m.

In its wan­ing days, the 111th Con­gress has taken on a Dick­ensi­an qual­ity for Demo­crats. They presided over one of the most con­sequen­tial ses­sions in mod­ern his­tory. They aimed high and hit their tar­gets more of­ten than not — then voters sent them pack­ing. Es­pe­cially for Demo­crats in the House, it has been the best of times and the worst of times.

Re­call the heady first months of 2009, when Pres­id­ent Obama was cruis­ing on ce­les­ti­al ap­prov­al rat­ings; there was talk of a per­man­ent Demo­crat­ic ma­jor­ity, and law­makers were eye­ing bold le­gis­lat­ive ac­tion, in­clud­ing a pub­lic health in­sur­ance op­tion and a cli­mate-change bill to cap car­bon emis­sions.

Cut to today. Demo­crats are strug­gling to de­fend their le­gis­lat­ive vic­tor­ies. One of Nancy Pelosi’s last acts as House speak­er will be to over­see a two-year ex­ten­sion of the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealth­i­est Amer­ic­ans, a huge de­feat for Demo­crats who had pledged to re­peal them. Deeply di­vided by the White House deal on taxes, the Demo­crat­ic ma­jor­ity in the House saw con­gres­sion­al ap­prov­al rat­ings drop to his­tor­ic lows in the fi­nal days of a Con­gress it con­trolled. Ac­cord­ing to polling from Gal­lup this week, barely one in eight Amer­ic­ans, 13 per­cent, ap­prove of the way Con­gress is do­ing its job.

Click to see a score­card of the 111th Con­gress

“The 111th Con­gress was an ex­traordin­ar­ily pro­duct­ive Con­gress, a trans­form­a­tion­al Con­gress whose mark will be felt in years to come, in health care, in eco­nom­ic re­cov­ery, in the fin­an­cial sec­tor,” said Trans­port­a­tion Com­mit­tee Chair­man James Ober­star of Min­nesota, who lost his bid for reelec­tion in one of the party’s sur­prise de­feats on Novem­ber 2. “His­tory will look bet­ter on this Con­gress in the next two to three years than the last elec­tion did.”

House Demo­crats, largely un­bowed by their re­pu­di­ation at the polls, be­lieve that their de­feat was linked to two factors: a weak eco­nomy and their own in­ab­il­ity to ar­tic­u­late their suc­cesses. It was not, they in­sist, a re­jec­tion of their le­gis­lat­ive product. “It was an ex­traordin­ar­ily pro­duct­ive Con­gress, but it’s hard to tell someone who doesn’t have a job or is los­ing his home, “˜Look at all the great stuff we did,’ “ said En­ergy and Com­merce Com­mit­tee Chair­man Henry Wax­man of Cali­for­nia. “What I think caused our de­feat was the eco­nomy, and there wasn’t any­thing any­one could say about our ac­com­plish­ments or pro­gress or any­thing else when people were hurt­ing so badly.”

The breadth of Demo­crats’ le­gis­lat­ive achieve­ment is not­able: from eco­nom­ic stim­u­lus, health care re­form, and fin­an­cial-reg­u­lat­ory over­haul to laws to bol­ster vo­lun­teer ser­vice and end gender dis­crim­in­a­tion in pay. In ad­di­tion, the House moved ma­jor le­gis­la­tion that failed to over­come the 60-vote threshold that gov­erns the Sen­ate’s abil­ity to act, in­clud­ing laws to curb car­bon emis­sions, re­form food-safety stand­ards, and tight­en cam­paign-fin­ance dis­clos­ure laws.

For Re­pub­lic­ans, poised to take con­trol of the House and with a six-seat gain in the Sen­ate, the tale of the 111th Con­gress is a cau­tion­ary one about how sweep­ing le­gis­lat­ive ac­tion can have severe elect­or­al con­sequences, even if law­makers be­lieve they are do­ing the right thing. Pelosi un­der­stood the elect­or­al risks. “We’re not here just to self-per­petu­ate our ser­vice in Con­gress,” she said earli­er this year. That was pres­ci­ent. Many of those who voted for the health care bill will not be back next year.

It is a les­son for the GOP to keep in mind as party lead­ers mull sweep­ing ac­tion of their own to de­fund the health care over­haul and re­form So­cial Se­cur­ity, im­mig­ra­tion laws, and the fed­er­al tax code. “His­tor­ic de­feats and ma­jor ac­com­plish­ments are not al­ways con­tra­dict­ory,” said out­go­ing House Budget Com­mit­tee Chair­man John Spratt of South Car­o­lina, who lost his reelec­tion bid. There are his­tor­ic par­al­lels. The ac­com­plish­ments of the 111th Con­gress have been com­pared to the Great So­ci­ety pro­grams of the 89th Con­gress and the John­son ad­min­is­tra­tion. Demo­crats did badly in both sub­sequent elec­tions — los­ing 47 House seats in 1966 and 63 this year.

“When you make the ma­jor de­cisions that are go­ing to res­ult in fun­da­ment­al change of the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment and the lives of the Amer­ic­an people, it’s go­ing to be pain­ful, it’s go­ing to be mis­un­der­stood, and his­tory will have to show that it was the right thing to do,” said Rep. G.K. But­ter­field, D-N.C. “But in the mean­time, you pay a polit­ic­al price, and that’s what you see here.”

One factor that nearly all Demo­crats seem to agree on is that they lost the mes­sage war against a Re­pub­lic­an Party that marched in near-lock­step op­pos­i­tion to their agenda. Rep. Emanuel Cleav­er of Mis­souri, the in­com­ing chair­man of the Con­gres­sion­al Black Caucus and a former may­or of Kan­sas City, says there is no bet­ter ex­ample of this fail­ure than the health care bill. Demo­crats not only failed to sell it to the Amer­ic­an pub­lic but they also seemed deaf to voters’ eco­nom­ic con­cerns as de­bate over the le­gis­la­tion raged for months on Cap­it­ol Hill. “Every­body here talked about health care, and I went home and every­one there talked about jobs,” Cleav­er said. “I think we make a ter­rible mis­take if we deny there was a dis­con­nect.” Spratt echoed the sen­ti­ment: “We failed to com­mu­nic­ate with our con­stitu­en­cies on health care.”

A stronger mes­sage ef­fort may go hand in hand with a more com­bat­ive ap­proach to the GOP. The les­sons of the past two years go both ways. Wax­man, al­though crit­ic­al of Re­pub­lic­ans’ ef­forts, ac­know­ledges their polit­ic­al suc­cess. “I think there are les­sons to learn that are fairly neg­at­ive ones — that if you are the “˜Party of No’ and take the op­por­tun­ity to scare people, you can be suc­cess­ful, and that is a sad com­ment­ary,” he said. Sad per­haps, but a point Demo­crats will pon­der as they plan their de­fense against GOP ef­forts to dis­mantle their le­gis­lat­ive vic­tor­ies.

What We're Following See More »
Al Gore Meeting with Ivanka Trump
49 minutes ago
Trump Native American Council Recommends Privatizing Indian Land
55 minutes ago

A group advising Donald Trump on Native American issues is encouraging him to privatize Indian reservations, taking the land out of the hands of the "suffocating federal bureaucracy." Currently, tribes have rights to the land but don't own it, meaning they can drill, but only under strenuous government restriction. Markwayne Mullin, a Republican congressman from Oklahoma and a member of the Cherokee tribe thinks the plan would be supported by Native American tribes nationally.

Trump to Nominate Carson to Lead HUD
4 hours ago

As has been rumored for a week, Donald Trump will nominate Ben Carson, his former rival, to lead the Department of Housing and Urban Development. In a statement, Trump said, "We have talked at length about my urban renewal agenda and our message of economic revival, very much including our inner cities. Ben shares my optimism about the future of our country and is part of ensuring that this is a Presidency representing all Americans. He is a tough competitor and never gives up."

Stein Drops Pennsylvania Recount
4 hours ago

"Supporters of Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein on Saturday withdrew a last-ditch lawsuit in Pennsylvania state court aimed at forcing a statewide ballot recount, another major setback in the effort to verify the votes in three states that provided President-elect Donald Trump his margin of victory. Ms. Stein’s campaign announced in a statement Saturday that the Pennsylvania lawsuit had been dropped after the court demanded that a $1 million bond be posted by the 100 Pennsylvania residents who brought the suit."

Trump Threatens 35% Tariff on Companies that Move Overseas
4 hours ago

In a series of early-morning tweets on Sunday, Donald Trump threatened companies that attempt to relocate out of the country. "Any business that leaves our country for another country, fires its employees, builds a new factory or plant in the other country, and then thinks it will sell its product back into the U.S. without retribution or consequence, is WRONG!," he wrote. "There will be a tax on our soon to be strong border of 35% for these companies."


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.