Playing the Hand Your Dealt
I don't often disagree with Streiff's assessment of local politics, but I don't think his assessment of yesterday's budget hearings does the Republican Caucus justice in this regard.
As soon as President Miller and Speaker Busch called for public hearings and a public airing of Republican ideas; the caucuses were faced with a Hobson's Choice:
- Show up; or,
- Not show up.
- Show up, and you get the opportunity to air your grievances publicly, in front of citizens and the media. You get the opportunity to show the people and legislative leadership that there are, in fact, real alternatives to the failure of Martin O'Malley and the Democrats to lead on this issue; or,
- Don't show up, and then the story becomes Republicans not wanting to present their ideas on fixing the budget.
The fact that Republicans participated in the budget hearing was the best of all possible solutions, particularly when you consider the media hellstorm that would have followed had the Republican caucus balked.
That leads into a different problem; everybody and their brother knew that the Republican budget ideas were not going to get a fair shake in the media. Which leads me to wonder where the hell the Maryland Republican Party has been on this issue. What messages, emails, and talking points have gone out to aggressively push the Republican side of the story?
Frankly, there are two points that need to be said about the State Party media operation;
- One, it seems to comprise short, pithy, not particularly aggressive our meaningful press releases; and,
- Two, it seems to me that we here at Red Maryland seem to have a more aggressive and organized media operation than the State Party does.
Now, we have to do our part to grow their numbers this fall....
(Crossposted)
5 comments:
Well written, tightly written, well reasoned.
I agree with Streiff that this was an opportunity by the Democrats to get a cudgel to use against us and they will. But our GOP members in Annapolis are very capable, frustrated by being locked out and have the desire and capacity to lead this State in a better direction. I commend them for putting that on display yesterday and hope that there are enough open minded Marylanders who will acknowledge that come November.
We likely will see the same thing in Washington today. Republicans with good ideas we all know they have set up by Dems to be punching bags. But maybe, since they have decided to do it, we can hope that the good ideas punch through the theatre and voters gain more confidence in a superior GOP alternative.
First, I want to thank Brian for posting this. We're going to continue to disagree on this but that's why we are a group blog.
I agree that you are dealt a hand to play. The real question is not whether you play it well but if you even realize the game you are playing.
If there was a reasonable chance that the Democrats were actually going to consider some of the proposals, I'd feel much differently. But they aren't. And everyone knew that up front.
You don't owe an honest answer to a dishonest question.
I'd just point to the GOP history in the US Congress. Who contributed most to a GOP takeover in 1994, the Minority Leader Bob Michel (a genuinely good man) or Minority Whip Newt Gingrich?
Michel behaved as the Maryland GOP does, under the assumption that their views are actually worth something and that they are a part of the process of governance. Gingrich operated under the assumption that his mission was to beat the Democrats on every issue on every day, either legislatively or by controlling the narrative.
So I don't believe they played their hand well. The hearing, itself, was an act of theater and condescension and our team responded as if they were going to be welcomed as part of the team. They should have responded with theater.
And I think they weren't clear on the game being played. They showed up to play bridge and the game being played by the Democrats, to judge from their reception of the ideas, was "Go Fish."
So I have to ask, how did this appearance at a legislative kangaroo court move our agenda forward either in the General Assembly or with the voters? I understand their frustration but I don't see how this was useful.
But it is what it is and we can hope that they don't cooperate in the double digit tax increases O'Malley and his fellow travelers will enact to avoid actually doing anything about the budget. But I'm not holding my breath.
You are right, Streiff we do disagree. I don't know that any of these members had any illusions that the Dems were seriously going to consider their proposals. In fact, I would wage Tony O'Donnell, et al. know full well they won't.
Having said that, I don't know that taking the opporunity to show that there is a real alternative from people willing to show that they can govern seriously is worse than refusing the opportunity and being castigated for having no idea.
Right it is a dishonest question but I think there may be a better response than refusing to answer.
The Gringich Republicans did have a postive agenda which was as critical to their success as opposing the excesses and abuses of the Dem Congress.
The Contract with America was a 1994 item. Most of Gingrich's career, such as when he hijacked C-SPAN House coverage, was strictly guerrilla warfare and political theater.
And for that matter, our guys didn't offer anything like CWA at the hearing.
Post a Comment