Ah, schadenfreude... maybe I'm a bad, bad person for giggling at conservatives' handwringing over the Republicans' performance in Congress, but I just can't help it.
A May 27, 2005 editorial in The Wall Street Journal " says it all:
Americans have learned to expect little from Congress, and by that standard the 109th version controlled by Republicans has met expectations. On the other hand, anyone who hoped that the GOP would make something of its historic governing opportunity is bound to be disappointed so far.
Five months in, Congress can point to the following achievements: a bankruptcy bill 10 years in the making, and a class-action reform watered down essentially to a jurisdictional change to federal from state courts. That's about it. Among the 2004 campaign promises that aren't close to being fulfilled are making the Bush tax cuts permanent, reforming Social Security and expanding the market for private health care. Instead of any of those big three, Congress next seems poised to pass a subsidy-laden energy bill and a highway bill with some 4,000 earmarks for individual Members. For this we elected Republicans?
(Emphasis mine.)
Translation: "I trusted you, George! But you didn't help the haves and the have-mores the way you said you would! You promised!"
As for Social Security, this statement makes it obvious that not only do some Republicans disagree with Bush's Social Security proposal, but some of them are downright irritated that he isn't pulling it off the way he said he would.
More:
Pre-emptive surrender has also been the order of the day on taxes, despite the manifest economic success of the 2003 tax cuts. It took a heroic, one-man lobbying effort by Arizona's Jon Kyl to persuade his Senate colleagues to extend the 15% dividend and capital-gains tax rate for a mere two years. Too many GOP Members are cowering in fear over "the deficit" -- except when it comes to spending. That they can still do. The Senate blew past Mr. Bush's already generous $284 billion limit on highways, and overall federal spending is growing by 7% this year.
Any majority party is going to have differences, and compromises are inevitable. But an effective majority, and one that hopes to stay around for a while, has to be able to unite around some governing principles and face up to genuine problems. We'd have thought that for Republicans this would mean a philosophy of limited but energetic government when energy is needed, as it is on national defense and law enforcement.
Hmm... sounds like this editorial will be clipped, savored, and framed by Cato Republicans everywhere.
The final few lines are the pièce de résistance:
Above all, the fight over Mr. Bush's Supreme Court nominations will determine whether the GOP's Senate majority counts for anything at all. The voters don't expect miracles, but they do expect better than what Republicans have so far been able to produce.
As far as I'm concerned, the more disappointed Republicans, the better.