Not So Fast

By instigating the recent shutdown of all non-essential government operations, Republicans in Washington are shooting themselves—or at least their supposedly unshakeable ideology of orthodox small government—in the foot. While statements such as this have become bromidic in current anti-GOP fervor, they are normally tinged with considerable sadism and Schadenfreude. However, the general consensus among the nation’s elite, which (cheerfully) suggests that the intransigence of Republicans in Congress will sour voters on the party as a whole, has little to do with the peril in which small government ideology currently finds itself. This line of reasoning rests upon a faulty account of United States history; in fact, big government advocates with healthier recall skills will find that while the shutdown may have little effect on the fortunes of their favored party, it has the distinct possibility to lead to the continuous expansion of government for the decade to come.

Prior to the shutdown, the notion of small government had been doing pretty well in America. Sequestration, despite being criticized by both parties, had been doing a fine job curtailing runaway government spending. While President Obama won reelection, Republicans maintained their significant majority in the House of Representatives. Intrusive gun control legislation has repeatedly failed in Congress, and a libertarian in the Paul political family is finally earning nationwide respect and support. Yet, unwilling to win several battles now or to postpone eventual victory in the war, Congressional Republicans have embarked on the quixotic mission to defund, and hopefully repeal, Obamacare. This has led, somewhat improbably, to the current impasse in D.C. Congressional Republicans successfully orchestrated the shutdown of the government, although their ultimate goals remain unclear to everyone involved.

Wistful Democrats rejoice at the implications the standoff has for what they see as a truculently disagreeable political party. After all, poll numbers show that the American people are blaming Republicans for the shutdown. Combine this with conventional wisdom surrounding the 1995 government shutdown, when Newt Gingrich’s poll numbers sunk to a level now-Senator Al Franken ’73 quipped as “only four points higher than the Unabomber,” and the future of the Republican Party seems dead on arrival. And in the last presidential election immediately following a government shutdown, a Clinton won by a landslide—an auspicious omen for Democrats looking ahead to Hillary’s chances in 2016.

However, reports of the death of the Republican Party are highly exaggerated. While Senator Ted Cruz is incorrect in believing the government shutdown good for his political ideology, he is not wrong in saying, “The sort of cocktail chatter wisdom in Washington that, ‘Oh, the [1995-96] shutdown was a political disaster for Republicans,’ is not borne out by the data.” That logic is borne out by facts: While Republicans’, like Speaker Gingrich’s, poll numbers may have tanked, the electoral results in 1996 were inconsequential. Despite Clinton’s easy victory at the presidential level, the GOP managed to pick up two Senate seats, all the while holding on to all but two seats in the House. To put even more perspective on matters, current backlash against the Republican Party pales in comparison to the high disfavor of the party in 1995.

When it was all said and done, there was actually very little political fallout for the Republican Party as a result of the mid-90s shutdown. Gingrich retained his speakership until the end of the decade, when he handed power to fellow Republican Dennis Hastert (whose eponymous Hastert Rule is one reason the House of Representatives has yet to vote on a continuing resolution for the budget), and control of the White House passed from Bill Clinton to George W. Bush. With the exception of 2001-2002, in which Vermont Senator Jim Jeffords switched caucuses mid-term in order to give the Democrats a majority in the Senate, the GOP held control of both chambers of Congress until the 2006 blue wave knocked it out of power in the legislative branch.

Although the political consequences of a shutdown have historically been non-negative—if not immediately positive—for the uncompromising party, that does not mean the future of small government conservatism is bright. While there is no evidence to suggest that the Republican Party itself will suffer permanently from the current situation, its political ideology might not be so lucky. One need only consider the 1994 Republican Revolution, which rode into Washington insisting on slashing big government agencies and getting rid of burdensome entitlements. It held these positions in its Contract With America, promising to reform Medicare and Social Security, get the government out of student loans, and, first and foremost, balance the budget.

By the time the 12-year majority of Gingrich-era Republicans had come to a close the limited government ideas espoused in the Contract With America had become a sham. Bush and the GOP Congress of the aughts took the nation’s finances in the wrong direction, notably with the $1.2 trillion Medicare prescription drug benefit and two costly wars. Out were the days in which the GOP expressed their devotion to Goldwater’s limited government manifesto “Conscience of a Conservative.” In were the days the of turning that into the big government credo of “compassionate conservatism.”

Republicans must be careful not to head down this road again. Fearing constituents and desiring victories, high-paid political consultants will tell the party that they need to moderate in order to be successful. Obviously, in some aspects—notably tactics and strategy—they do. But when it comes to their beliefs in a small government, they’d best not listen. Maybe they should stop trying to block the implementation of Obamacare. But, for the country’s sake, the near future should not be marked by a Republican Party that supports programs like it for political reasons.

John F. M. Kocsis ’15, a Crimson editorial writer, is a government concentrator in Eliot House. His column appears on alternate Fridays. Follow him on Twitter @jfmkocsis.