Mark Foley and the House Banking Scandal
A writer in the American Prospect compared Mark Foley to the House Banking scandal, and thus sees Foleygate bringing GOP rule of the House of Representatives to an end in the election next month:
Republicans are in trouble — and it is not the kind of trouble that dissipates with time or the kind that can be overridden by the usual political subterfuge or great 30-second ads in the waning weeks of the campaign. This is the kind of trouble that takes root. It is found not just in the garden variety public cynicism most politicians are used to enduring, but in the personal, visceral disdain occasioned by people being able to see clear through to politicians’ motives and character — and being repelled by them.
As a result, I am now in the big-wage tent betting that the GOP will lose control of both houses of Congress — and, in the House, likely not by a small margin,. And it is Mark Foley who will play a larger-than-anticipated role in his party’s demise….
A lot of questionable comparisons have been drawn between the midterms of 2006 and those of 1994, but I think the Foley scandal parallels the house banking scandal in a very damaging way for Republicans. Back then, amid abstract discussions by the GOP about smaller government and lower taxes, there sprang from the political heavens this ridiculous story about people who bounced checks without any consequences. Americans did not have to compare notes or go sifting through their own political baggage to understand that a bunch of powerful Democrats were using their position of privilege to act irresponsibly and without fear of any consequences.
We have two problems with all this. First of all, we completely fail to understand the idea that Foley has any impact on the election next month, even if more GOP Foleys are outed in the next few weeks (though many seasoned political observers do not share our view). What’s the alternative, the party that favors gay marriage, higher taxes, judicial activism and so forth? Are we really expected to buy the notion that we should not vote our interests, but rather what TIME and Newsweek and CNN and Nancy Pelosi have to say about some obscure congressmen? Are GOP voters really that stupid?
Second, regarding the analysis in the American Prospect, the writer has perhaps forgotten that the House Banking Scandal was in 1992, not 1994. The House Banking Scandal did not result in any shift of power. As we have written, 258 Democrats were elected to Congress in 1992 and only 176 Republicans. The dramatic shift of power in 1994 — a shift af about 100 total votes in the House — was the result of substantive issues, notably the Clinton tax increase and Hillarycare, among others. People voted their interests in 1994, and weren’t having a hissy fit over check-bouncing. We expect that people will vote their interests once again in 2006.