Using a poker metaphor, publius argues that the House GOP today took a big chance by voting unanimously against Obama and the Democrats economic stimulus plan:
That’s…what the House Republicans did today when they
voted unanimously against the stimulus – they went all in before the
flop. And now they too are completely at the mercy of the flop — and
fate — with a less than stellar hand.
Frankly, I don’t think it
was a completely irrational move considering the circumstances. The
House Republicans’ long-term prospects ain’t good – they’re locked into
a declining, southern-centric demographic base getting smaller by the
year. Plus, it's not like voting for the stimulus will reverse these
trends. If it works, Obama will probably get credit regardless of what
the GOP does. Accordingly, the GOP decided to do something more
drastic, and then hope for the best by hoping for the worst.
And
it might work. The flop might save them. Maybe the economy will get
even worse in 2 or 4 years. If so, the Republicans can stand up and
say, “if only we had cut more taxes, if only we hadn’t wasted all this
money…” And who knows? If the economy continues to tank, that might
get some traction.
risky strategy. The GOP locked themselves into a game of Russian
roullette today. If the economy gets better, or if the GOP somehow
manages to block it in the Senate, then the Republicans’ unanimous
opposition could send the party into the wilderness for a long time to
come.
He then compares this vote to the Republican opposition to the New Deal, which unquestionably did send the GOP into the wilderness when it succeeded. But though I almost always agree with this writer, in this case the comparison that comes to my mind is the Clinton economic plan. That too passed the House without a single Republican vote, helped revive the economy, but didn't hurt the GOP one bit. In fact they came charging back to take over the House two years later.
So — I'm not sure they've risked all that much. Sorry to say.
Kit Stolz 