CR Nation

The NRCC (National Republican Campaign Committee) has less cash on hand than their projections, and more importantly, than their counterparts. Right now, estimates say that the NRCC should have $58 million. Instead, our Republican leaders in the House are looking at $27 million.

Moreover, the NRCC’s cash on hand as of April 30th was a mere $6.7 million, while DCCC (Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee) has $45 million.

Some say the problem is due to the loss of control in 2006. Some say wealthy GOP-ers are not putting their money with the party because of trust or because they know their investments may go to no-win candidates. Some say the entire House Republican leadership should change if another major loss comes about in November. I say it all depends on who grabs the presidency.

Lace provides us with the list of potential vice-presidential candidates. Upcoming posts will deal with why Senator McCain should pick Governor Crist(my choice of the three), Governor Romney, or Governor Jindal. But I want to look at the other candidates that may be under consideration. There are some stipulations. First, the candidate cannot be a current Bush Administration official(due to the Democrats’ howls if someone resigned from their job or tried to stay on and campaign). The candidate must be born after 1943. The candidate must be a Republican(sorry, I love Joe Lieberman too, but then you’d have to consider Michael Bloomberg and that is something I want to avoid). The candidate must be either a current or former governor, U.S. Senator, Member of Congress, or Cabinet-rank official(sorry Michael Steele fans). I didn’t mention any senators, but Sen. Coburn, Sen.DeMint, Sen. Burr, and Sen. Thune would be good.

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee. Huck brings advantages to the ticket-he’s affable, likable, and charming. His support for the FairTax is spot-on and admirable. He did a great job improving Arkansas roads(what’s Senator Obama done for transportation?) and is a strong pro-life and traditional marriage supporter who could turn out weary social conservatives to the polls. But there are downsides. Huckabee has a troublesome record on tax and spending issues that would burden Senator McCain’s efforts to reach out to fiscal conservatives like the Club for Growth, who tried to stop Governor Huckabee’s candidacy with all its might.  He has a penchant for gaffes, especially with foriegn policy issues. His connections to pastors under congressional investigation would surely bring headaches the McCain campaign wouldn’t need, as would the old charges of gifts recieved and not reported when he was governor. So there’s a lot to consider if he’s the guy.

Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty. T-Paw  has some downsides, such as his views on climate change, controversies over transportation, and the cigarette tax hike. But overall, he’s done a good job of growing jobs in Minnesota, holding the line on spending, passed tort reform, lowered the tax burden on Minnesotans, pushed for strong trade relations with other countries(which helps with reaching out to farmers), and passed tough crime legislation cracking down on meth and putting more State Troopers on the road and forensic scientists in the labs. Would help McCain on domestic issues and could swing Minnesota and other Upper Midwest states.

Utah Governor Jon Huntsman Jr. .  His strong record on spending restraint, economic growth, market-friendly health care reform, and good steward of the environment put him on the list. His business background would be a plus, as would his experience in the Reagan and both Bush White Houses. He doesn’t have the political or foriegn policy problems Romney presents. However, he comes from a deep-red state and is running for re-election. That should keep him off the ticket in 2008.

Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels-See above and add controversies over daylight savings time and lease of the Indiana Toll Road. He will face a tough re-election fight unlike Huntsman and is also from a deep-red state. His budget expertise is bar none as the former OMB director, but Senator McCain should not put Governor Daniels on the ticket.

Former OMB Director and Ohio Congressman Rob Portman-Portman has a strong expertise on economic and fiscal matters going back to his days in the Bush 41 White House. He has a strong conservative record on virtually every issue and his time as White House trade representative gives him gravitas on international issues. Some conservatives might be concerned for his support of the Bush 41 tax hike, but he supported the Bush 43 tax cuts. He is popular in Ohio, which is essential to winning the White House. McCain would have to fight the Democrats’ efforts to demagogue his service under President Bush, but he would be a great pick.

Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour-His record as White House Political Director, RNC Chair, and Governor are storied. He is a great budget-cutter,pro-lifer, tort-reformer, and his response to Hurricane Katrina showed his excellent leadership skills. But the pundits would make hay out of his lobbying career, painting him as cozy with Big Tobacco and Big Pharma, undercutting Senator McCain’s reformer image. That’s too bad, because he would be a great veep.

Former Congressman John Kasich-A good conservative who’s been out of politics awhile. Look for a statewide run instead.

Former Congressman J.C. Watts-See above.

Alaska Governor Sarah Palin-She’s accomplished ethics reform,fought for more energy exploration, and held the line on spending. But she is needed in Alaska. She will be a national figure, but not yet.

Congressman Eric Cantor-The chief deputy whip in the House is a strong conservative across the board and would help in Virginia. He would also bolster efforts to reach Jewish voters as the only Jewish House Republican. Cantor would probably turn down the job because of aspirations to lead the House one day.

Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn-She’s a strong conservative woman from the South and one of our favorites down here in Tennessee. Blackburn worked against Governor Sundquist’s state income tax and has fought for lower taxes, less spending, and strong families in the House.

Congressman Paul Ryan-The only other contender born in the 1970’s, Congressman Ryan is a lion at the tender age of 38. In Congress he’s sounded the alarm for entitlement and budget reform as the top Republican on the Budget Committee. A pro-lifer,he’s a strong supporter of market solutions in health-care and education as well. Ryan would put Wisconsin in play and energize conservatives.

There’s the rundown. Thoughts and comments?

House Democrats promised earmark reform, but have failed to act out of self interest and power preservation – the same reasons Republicans weren’t interested in earmark reform..

However, the Democrats’ inaction has not prevented House Republicans (now in the minority and interested in reforming earmarks) from enacting modest, gradual and “self-imposed” reform on themselves.

Rep. Boehner put it well: “House Republicans have changed…we fully recognize the failure to control earmarks helped cost our party the majority, and dramatic change is needed.”

Until Democrats agree to dramatically reform and reduce earmarked spending, House Republicans have agreed to set higher standards for themselves. They have agreed to:

No More “Monuments to Me”: Ending the use of taxpayer money to fund projects named after members of Congress.

No More “Airdropping” Pork at the Last Minute: Ending the practice of avoiding scrutiny of pet projects by adding them to legislation at the last minute.

No More “Front” Groups to Launder Earmarks: Ending the practice of designating earmarks for “front” operations that mask the true recipients of pork-barrel spending

These are good, if not incomplete steps to solving the problem.

However, I don’t think sufficient earmark reform will come until motivation behind the reform is more about manifesting the will of the people and a sincere belief in the corrupting nature of earmarks; and less about taking a one of the majority’s tools to maintain power…

In other words, at this point, the think Republicans are (conveniently) pushing earmark reform more out of a desire to take away the Democrats’ ability to use the federal budget as a campaign tool – a tool Republicans will likely seek to reinstate once back in the majority – and less out of a desire to do the will of the people or in a belief that earmarks are corrupting and erode trust in government.

An excerpt from the Chicao Tribune sent to us by IL state chair, Patrick Binning.

Former U.S. Congressman Henry Hyde, who led the impeachment effort against President Bill Clinton and also sponsored a high-profile anti-abortion amendment, died today.

He was a 32-year veteran of the House and was known for his soaring speeches and high intellect. But he was also a tough Republican partisan who rose to lead two key House committees, Judiciary and International Relations.

During the impeachment of Clinton, Hyde pushed the charges against Clinton through his panel in a bitterly partisan fight. Even though the House approved the impeachment charges, the Senate later refused to remove Clinton from office.

On Tuesday, House Republicans prevented Democratic leaders from blocking a resolution to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney.

The vote to table the resolution, offered by Ohio Democrat Dennis Kucinch, began as a largely party-line vote to kill the measure, but Republicans developed a strategy to force Democrats to debate the resolution by supporting Kucinich.

GOP leaders felt as though it was in their interest to debate the measure because it would make Democrats look bad.

So, after more than an hour of waiting for the vote to close during which Democratic leaders failed to convince a group of liberal caucus members to side with them, the motion to table the resolution failed by a vote of 162-251 after Democratic leaders failed to convince a group of liberal caucus members to side with them.

Republican lawmakers and aides credited Rep. John Shadegg (R-Ariz.) for coming up with the idea.