The Black Republican

At the Wall Street Journal, John Fund is taking another swipe at knocking some sense into the Republicans in Congress.

Ken Mehlman is the unflappable efficiency expert who chairs the Republican National Committee. Because he's not known for histrionics, his warning last week to GOP congressional staffers about this November's elections caused many on Capitol Hill to bolt upright.

Mr. Mehlman traveled to Capitol Hill to warn the staffers that they risked a disaster at the polls if they didn't pass meaningful legislation the conservative base cares about. Other GOP strategists go even further. "If the election were held today, I'd say the odds are 90% that we'd lose the House," says GOP consultant Mike Murphy.

Other Republicans aren't as gloomy, but they warn the GOP Congress has to act on a range of issues soon. "If we want to ensure voter turnout among conservatives doesn't drop, we've got to perform," says Rep. Jack Kingston, a Georgia Republican who dropped by The Wall Street Journal's offices on Friday. He adds it is imperative that the bloated "emergency" spending bill passed by the Senate this week not become law and that some immigration bill clears Congress....

The latest Wall Street Journal/NBC poll offered respondents a menu of legislative action Congress could address before it goes home this year. Asked to choose which should be its top priority, a stunning 39% selected "prohibiting Members of Congress from directing federal funds to specific projects benefiting only certain constituents"--i.e., the pork-barrel spending at the heart of the Congressional earmark process. Immigration reform was in second place with 32%. It would be ironic if the big-spending strategy Tom DeLay thought was a key to shoring up incumbents and keeping GOP control of Congress winds up ending that control.

Anyone remember what item #1 in The Contract for America was, twelve years ago when we finally kicked the Democrats out of power? It was something called The Fiscal Responsibility Act.

The bill contains two budgetary reforms: a constitutional balanced budget amendment and a permanent line-item veto.

Supporters of a balanced budget amendment argue that Congress has shown itself both unwilling and incapable of balancing the federal budget. A constitutional amendment is necessary to force lawmakers to do what, on their own, they cannot: get a handle on out-of-control spending....

Proponents of the line-item veto maintain that given our current deficit situation, the president should have the authority to single out unnecessary and wasteful spending provisions in bills passed by Congress....

Some wonks might try to point out that Republicans only guaranteed they would bring the provisions of the Contract up to a vote, and these amendments never got past the Senate, nevermind the states for ratification. But implicit was the promise that Republicans would continue to champion these ideals, and in that respect conservatives have a solid case that the Republican Party is in breach of Contract.

The Contract for America and all its provisions are still displayed prominently on the House web servers. It might be wise for Republican members of Congress to review exactly what they promised us that got them elected in the first place.