Those wary of the birth of the Gingrich Nation can look at it this way: After 40 years in charge, even some House Democrats privately concede that they had become arrogant, self- indulgent and complacent. The Republican minority that nurtured Newt, meanwhile, had grown immature and irresponsible. For the most part, the Congress behaved like a bunch of truants more interested in assigning blame than in taking responsibility. Republican control of the House is a stunner, but it is equally astonishing that it took so long for fair-minded voters to give the other guys a chance.
It's refreshing to talk with politicians humbled by their mandate. Rep. David Dreier of California, possibly the next chairman of the House Rules Committee, admits to a certain nervousness about the fact that "people are expecting a lot from us." Rep. John Kasich of Ohio, the next budget chairman, says, "It's all pretty crazy right now, but we know what we have to do." And despite the fiscal chicanery of the GOP's "Contract With America" -- a pandering and underfinanced legislative agenda --at least the Republicans are talking about keeping promises, making government smaller and making it work. That, after all, is what the mandate is all about. And it's back to the back benches if they don't deliver.
Republicans must now perform a counterintuitive task: Take power and then give it away. The only attractive part of the GOP contract calls for revamping Congress -- applying all federal laws to its members, cutting the staff by one third, opening floor debate and limiting the terms of committee chairs. Others suggest fairer committee ratios, since Democrats routinely stacked the most powerful panels. It's all there in his bestselling Book of Virtues, says Republican guru Bill Bennett. "We should treat them the way we wanted to be treated." Virtue aside, the political calculation is that the new GOP majority cannot behave like the old Democratic majority. "We have to take the power voters gave us," says GOP pollster Ed Goeas, "and use it to dismantle power in Washington."
Gridlock. It's about time. Republicans and Democrats have been making noise about reforming themselves for years, setting up bipartisan panels to make proposals that congressional leaders routinely ignored. The House has 147 committees and subcommittees, and more than 11,000 staffers. Committee heads argue more about turf than sub stance. Remember the fights over who would handle health care reform? Five chairmen made bids; they all won.
Will the Republic suffer if the Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee merges with the Committee on Natural Resources? Will the public be ill served if members can serve on only two panels each? And limiting chairmanships to six years could have a greater effect on Congress than term limits. But reforms need a reality check: When Republicans promise to cut the congressional staff, will they fire only Democrats? And let's see whether they actually vote for fairer committee representation for the new minority.
For their part, the Democrats may find this liberating. As a minority, they can watch the Republicans struggle to govern while they unify in opposition. The Democrats will survive the demise of patron saints like House Speaker Tom Foley; some even privately applaud the relegation of barons like banking Chairman Henry Gonzalez and energy Chairman John Dingell to minority status. "We were all cheering when the Politburo fell apart," says one Western moderate. "We should have looked at ourselves. Democrats have to admit that when we were in charge, we'd shave the debate."
The new Republican Congress will pass the internal reforms the Democrats know they should have instituted long ago. But all incumbents will benefit: Success will be a first step toward restoring accountability to an institution with a 20 percent approval rating. And it will provide political capital to underwrite consideration of bigger agenda items -- a balanced budget amendment, a line-item veto, tax cuts, welfare and health care reform. The public has heard the arguments about these issues, but this election has changed the stakes. Competitive congressional politics have returned; debates are for real again.
When Bill Clinton was elected, he promised to slash both his own and the congressional staff. He succeeded at the White House, but after a meeting with Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell and House Speaker Foley, he backed off. The leaders, he said, had assured him they had already done enough cutting. It was a defining moment. "Everyone wanted reform, and Clinton campaigned on it," says GOP pollster Ed Goeas. "Then he traded it away when he walked out of that meeting." Now Foley has lost and Mitchell has retired. And Clinton watches as Republicans reform a Congress that he could have made his own.
