House Republican leaders have released a proposal to keep funding government through the election, the so-called continuing resolution. The proposed CR includes a 6-month extension of the Export-Import Bank.
Because of this Ex-Im extension, Heritage Action, one of the most powerful lobbies for conservative policy, opposes extension. Rep. Jeb Hensarling, chairman of the House Financial Services and the leading congressional opponent of Ex-Im, is okay with the deal.
It would be hard to peg Hensarling as a sellout to big-government corporatism. The dispute should be seen as a tactical one. Here’s a simplified breakdown of the different views:
View 1: Fight Next Year
That’s from The Hill, and it reflects some fears on K Street — and what might be Hensarling’s tactical approach.
Next year, Republicans could control the Senate, which could make killing Ex-Im easier. Ex-Im opponent Sen. Mitch McConnell would be Senate majority leader. Also, given 9 months, conservatives could whip some more votes against the agency or craft a real reform with teeth — that is, something to drastically slash Ex-Im’s size and scope — that could pass both chambers.
Also, June will be in the midst of the GOP presidential primary season. Nearly every candidate will oppose Ex-Im. Certainly all conservative candidates will. In that environment, there may be more will among congressional Republicans to kill or dramatically shrink Ex-Im.
Fighting this month risks losing much worse. If the House never passes an extension of Ex-Im, then the Senate gets to set the terms of the debate — and Sen. Harry Reid wants to pass President Obama‘s five-year, no-meaningful-strings-attached renewal of Ex-Im. If Reid attaches that five-year Ex-Im to the CR, Republicans would be in a position of getting blamed for a government shutdown or extending Ex-Im for five years. Given that House Speaker John Boehner and about half of the House Republicans don’t really mind Ex-Im, it seems fairly likely that wouldn’t end with a conservative victory.
View 2: Fight Now
This is the view of Heritage Action, as conveyed in an email:
First, the view is that conservatives shouldn’t sully their hands by supporting any extension of Ex-Im. Second, these conservatives argue that if Ex-Im is to be renewed, it should at least be done through a clean up-or-down vote, so supporters of the subsidy agency are forced to go on record with their support. Third, the fight-now crowd points out that conservatives have some leverage over Speaker Boehner and Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy in September, before the GOP elects its leaders after the November election. If you push the fight into next year, Boehner and McCarthy could sell out conservatives, comfortable with their posts.
My own view
I see merit in both arguments. But I see it ultimately as a tactical disagreement. Intra-GOP tactical disputes often result in cries of “liberal!” and “sellout!” I disagree with Heritage Action that a vote for the CR (thus punting an Ex-Im debate into next year) is an unconservative vote.
