The Other Post-Election Struggle

The hardest fought race is in the House, where Phil Crane of Illinois and Bill Thomas of California are running to succeed Bill Archer, retiring chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee. On paper, Crane has the edge, with his conservative credentials (he ran to the right of Ronald Reagan for the GOP’s presidential nomination in 1980) and seniority (he’s the longest-serving Republican in the House, having arrived in 1969). In years past, these two factors alone would have guaranteed him the top job. But Newt Gingrich shook up the committee assignment system when he became speaker in 1995, passing over members for chairmanships if he deemed them too moderate or passive. (Crane, in fact, was passed over then for Ways and Means.)

The reason Crane isn’t a sure thing is that he has, over the years, become a non-entity in the House. He’s been a reliable conservative vote, but has done little to build support for his favored issues, largely because he was an alcoholic, regularly consuming 10 Heinekens a night. In March, eight of his friends conducted an intervention, and convinced him that if he was to have any hope of becoming Ways and Means chairman he’d need to stop drinking. He entered a rehabilitation facility shortly thereafter, where he stayed for a month, and he now proclaims himself a new man.

Crane’s willingness to confront his drinking problem has been well received by his colleagues, as has his fund-raising prowess. He garnered approximately $ 2.5 million for Republican campaign funds over the past two years, with $ 500,000 coming from a single contribution he solicited from an old friend, Silicon Valley executive Tom Siebel.

Crane is now thought to be the narrow favorite, though he has a formidable opponent in Thomas, who’s widely recognized as one of the smartest and most politically savvy House Republicans. But Thomas, a moderate, is often described as too smart for his own good. He tends to alienate not only his adversaries but even his allies with a brash manner. And it’s widely believed that if he ends up chairing the committee, he will tolerate little or no interference from the House GOP leadership. Crane would be more amenable to leadership intervention.

Thomas’s expected clout is one reason 13 current members of the committee signed a letter recently pledging to support him. But in the House GOP’s byzantine system of selecting committee chairmen, this counts for less than it might seem. The choice is actually made by a committee composed of the House leadership, committee chairmen, regional representatives, and one person from each of the three most recent House classes. Even more important, House speaker Denny Hastert gets five votes in the committee, which are likely to benefit his fellow Illinoisan, Crane. The other wild card in the race is the report in a California newspaper in June that Thomas, who’s married, was romantically involved with a well-known health care lobbyist in Washington. With the prospect of Thomas being investigated for conflict of interest — the committee has jurisdiction over certain health care issues — Republicans may decide Crane is the less risky choice.

The other high-stakes House contest is for the chairmanship of the Commerce Committee. It pits Billy Tauzin of Louisiana against Mike Oxley of Ohio. This race has been brewing for the past few years, with Tauzin emphasizing his skills as a legislator and communicator, and Oxley touting the fact that while he may be somewhat low profile he’s easy to work with, and has spent many more years as a Republican (Tauzin switched to the GOP in August 1995).

Unlike the Ways and Means race, this contest involves little intrigue. Both candidates are well liked by their colleagues, and the two are ideologically akin, though Tauzin is now the clear favorite. Not only did he raise more than Oxley this year, and campaign for more candidates, he’s also viewed as better equipped to win favorable media coverage. After the networks called Florida for Al Gore, he was quick to urge hearings, and received a burst of publicity. He also took the lead in the Firestone hearings, bashing the company and deflecting Democratic charges that the GOP was in the pocket of big business. Last, Tauzin threw the most lavish parties at this year’s Republican convention in Philadelphia — something aides and lobbyists are still talking about.

In the Senate, where leadership contests are determined by one-man, one-vote, the stakes are lower. As one Republican senator explains, “There are only two leadership jobs that have any real responsibility,” majority leader and the senatorial campaign committee. But this hasn’t stopped Pete Domenici of New Mexico from taking on Larry Craig of Idaho for the top job on the Policy Committee. Domenici’s candidacy has caught his colleagues off guard, as he’s not the insurgent type, and there have been no complaints about Craig. Indeed, Domenici himself says he has no quibble with the job Craig has done over the past four years.

So why’s he running? A Domenici aide says his boss is “looking to reenergize the policy shop. . . . He believes he may offer a slightly different slant on how the committee can be an effective resource for Republicans.” As a campaign theme, this hasn’t bowled over Domenici’s GOP colleagues. I asked one of them, who’s been lobbied by the veteran senator, why Domenici was running. “I don’t know,” he replied, after a long pause. Another senator speculated that Domenici is simply looking for something to do two years from now, when term limits require him to step aside as chairman of the influential Budget Committee — though Domenici’s aide strongly denies it.

Another popular theory is that Domenici is running to express his displeasure with Trent Lott, the Senate Republican leader. But Domenici and his aides have poured cold water on this. They note that after the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call reported Domenici’s supposed frustration with the Mississippi senator, he called Lott to assure him this was not the case. Allies of Domenici also point out that he’s offered to give a speech to the GOP caucus recommending Lott be reelected GOP leader — a meaningless gesture considering Lott faces no opposition, but symbolically important in the tradition-bound Senate.

Craig is expected to be reelected, though Domenici’s best chance may be to turn the race into an ideological contest, which he has so far refused to do. With all the leadership slots occupied by conservative Young Turks, he could argue there needs to be a moderate/Old Bull presence. That would be a risky strategy in a caucus dominated by conservatives, but it would give his campaign something it currently lacks: a compelling theme.

The Young Turk/Old Bull struggle is also playing itself out in the race for conference chairman. This contest, necessitated by the retirement of Connie Mack, pits Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania against Kit Bond of Missouri. Santorum was elected in 1994 as a crusading conservative, and is still remembered for attempting to dislodge liberal Republican Mark Hatfield from a committee chairmanship because he voted against the balanced budget amendment. Bond, elected in 1986, is slightly less conservative, and less prone to rock the boat, though his efforts to rein in HUD secretary Andrew Cuomo have been a model of congressional oversight.

Asked about the race, a Republican senator said he gave the edge to Santorum for a simple reason: He’s been running for a leadership position ever since Mack announced his retirement in March 1999. Bond, by contrast, didn’t fully make his intentions known until September. Santorum also benefits from having smoothed over some of his rough edges and winning reelection earlier this month as a conservative in a Northeastern state that tends to favor moderate Republicans like Arlen Specter, Tom Ridge, and the late John Heinz. And while his whip team consists of conservatives like Mike DeWine, Craig Thomas, and Tim Hutchinson, Santorum also has the backing of Specter, which will help allay moderate concerns.

Regardless of how this contest, and the others, turn out, what’s most striking about the GOP maneuvering is just how little of it there is. In the House, all of the incumbent members of the leadership were reelected unanimously. And in the Senate, there’s no hint of rebellion against Lott or his number two, Don Nickles. This might seem surprising considering Republicans failed to pick up seats in either chamber. But there’s a feeling within the GOP that they were fortunate just to keep their majorities. How Republicans build on these majorities is a riddle for the leadership and the committee chairmen to answer. But the person they’re all convinced would guarantee a hefty boost in their numbers two years from now is one whose success they are loath to wish for: a President Al Gore.

Matthew Rees is a staff writer at THE WEEKLY STANDARD.