Speaker-in-waiting Newt Gingrich, a historian by training, always likes to put himself in some historical context. Even before last week's stunning election, he called himself a "transformational figure. ... We are at the end of an era," he declared confidently. "And some people have to form the bridge into the new one."
Some 51 Republican House seats later, Gingrich was looking remarkably like a bridge, although to what is still unclear. His stated goal is nothing less than a total renovation of government. But in recent years the Republican minority has grown more proficient with the wrecking ball; in order to govern, some of them will need reprogramming.
What is clear is the scope of the GOP victory. Republicans liken the election to Act II of the Reagan revolution, but even that may be an understatement: Not a single GOP incumbent lost his seat in Congress. In addition to winning the Senate and the House of Representatives, Republicans made substantial headway in the Midwest and the Northeast, and the South is now GOP country. "The old Southern bull Democrat is now a Republican," proclaims Mississippi Sen. Trent Lott, pointing out that 16 GOP senators now represent the 13 Southern states. Republicans cannot yet claim a party realignment, but last week's election may have been its precursor. "The earth moved," says GOP luminary Bill Bennett. "I can't yet say that this is where the voters' hearts are, but the opportunity is there for us."
Show time. The Republicans know they have to prove they can deliver. Many voters weren't endorsing the GOP so much as they were demanding the change they thought they had voted for in 1992: Downsize the government and make it more effective. The corollary has received less attention: Redirect power from Washington to the states. "We need to have the latitude to define our own programs," says Wisconsin's Republican Gov. Tommy Thompson, the new chairman of the National Governors' Association, who was re-elected with 67 percent of the vote. Texas Sen. Phil Gramm, who intends to parlay his success as Senate campaign chairman into a presidential bid, says Americans now consider government an adversary, not a friend. If the Republicans can repair the relationship, says GOP pollster Frank Luntz, "we are the majority party through the next decade. If we do it wrong, we may not get another chance."
The first step is the easiest. There is some agreement that, at the outset, Republicans must be seen trying to work with the Democrats on some bipartisan issues -- the line-item veto and congressional and lobbying reform as well as trade. But nobody thinks this initial cordiality will last, particularly given the complexion of the new Congress: The swelled Republican contingents in both chambers have moved sharply to the right, while the dwindling Democratic ranks have shifted to the left. Moderates, ironically, are becoming dinosaurs just when the public seems to be seeking a revival of the pragmatic center.
The bomb throwers have taken over the Old Boys' Club. North Carolina archconservative Sen. Jesse Helms will head the Foreign Relations Committee. New York's Alfonse D'Amato, who takes a keen interest in the Whitewater affair, will chair the Banking Committee. Conservative Orrin Hatch of Utah will examine Supreme Court appointments at Judiciary.
The new House leaders, meanwhile, hail from what one calls "Newtworld." Dick Armey, the conservative Texan who authored much of the GOP's "Contract With America," will be majority leader; deficit hawk John Kasich of Ohio will run the Budget Committee; national-sales-tax advocate Bill Archer of Texas -- who promises to cut capital-gains taxes and repeal the so-called marriage penalty -- will chair the Ways and Means panel.
Although the Republicans still do not have the 60 votes necessary for a filibusterproof majority in the Senate, that will not stop them from trying to send Clinton legislation they know he will veto. If the vetoes are unpopular, so much the better, says Lott, who could make a run to become the Senate's second in command. "We're going to look for things that if he doesn't sign, he will catch hell for it."
Gingrich's description last week of the Clintons as "counterculture McGoverniks" who are out of step "with the vast majority of Americans" is a sign of things to come. "I am very prepared to cooperate with the Clinton administration," said Gingrich last week. "I am not prepared to compromise." Once the goodwill evaporates completely, the second phase of the GOP strategy will be to champion legislation that highlights the differences between the parties. House Republicans have promised the voters welfare reform, term limits and about $200 billion in tax cuts in the next four years. Both chambers will push for more money for defense, though no one knows where it will come from.
The Republicans also intend to vote on an amendment calling for a balanced federal budget by the year 2002 -- a move requiring an additional $700 billion in tax increasesor spending cuts. Senator Gramm says he may propose a seven-year budget that includes big cuts in the Departments of Health and Human Services, Housing and Education; Kasich promises only that "we will make changes in the way the system works."
In search of unity. But there are splits within the GOP ranks, and no matter how hard Republicans try to smooth them over, it will be hard to reconcile deficit hawks and born-again supply-siders. Conservative strategist William Kristol argues that Republicans must write a clear plan to limit the size of government. "If our farm bill has agricultural subsidies like any other farm bill, it will be a big failure," he says. "We need to use this to lay the groundwork for a presidential campaign."
No one has to point that out to either Gramm or Bob Dole -- soon to be Senate majority leader -- both of whom are eyeing presidential candidacies in 1996. While Dole is known as a moderate, his presidential ambition -- and Gramm's position to his right -- could push him in the same direction. Although Gingrich once called Dole the "tax collector for the welfare state," both now downplay their differences. Dole made it clear that "if we don't produce, we'll get kicked out," yet he professed a sudden admiration for his House counterpart. "It's different when you're in the leadership," Dole explained. "We have a good understanding."
The key to Republican unity could be the governors. Although the balanced-budget amendment could pass costs on to the already overburdened states, so far Gingrich and company are promising governors what has become a new GOP buzzword: devolution. That means giving more power to the states and not passing any more "unfunded mandates" -- federal programs that force states to take action but provide no money to pay for them. "We have a natural alliance on that issue," says Michigan's Gov. John Engler.
Yet Republicans have to draw a fine line between downsizing -- or devolving -- government and dismantling it. "We have to be creative about how we use government and how we give its power back to the neighborhoods and the churches," says Republican strategist Vin Weber.
Another trap, some say, is overplaying the far right's social agenda. "If they say item No. 1 on our agenda is school prayer and item No. 2 is the human-life amendment ... they will walk off a cliff," says former George Bush aideJim Pinkerton. President Clinton highlighted his differences with the new congressional leadership last week by citing abortion rights and gun control, two issues that attract moderates in both parties. "Republicans are always talking about keeping government out of our lives but on this issue they want to put government right into our lives," says Ann Clay, a schoolteacher in Annandale, Va., who opposed GOP Senate candidate Oliver North largely because of his stance on the abortion issue.
So far, Republican leaders say this is not what they have in mind. Instead, their agenda is crammed with plans to scale ba
