Karl Rove's Doomsday Device
By Rob Goodman
With the midterm elections approaching, Republican strategists are busily searching for a way to avert disaster in the 70-some days remaining. Obviously, anything to do with terrorism helps: The foiling of the British airline plot brought President Bush’s approval ratings, uninvolved as he was, to a six-week high. Painting Democrats as cutting-and-running cowards has been a perennial fallback, as has the specter of Speaker Nancy Pelosi leading a frivolous impeachment investigation.
But while these tried-and-true tropes may yet win the battle of ideas, Republicans also know that nothing confers an advantage like procedural skullduggery. Tom Delay’s off-year redistricting in Texas ousted four Democratic congressmen and helped turn the state’s congressional delegation from 17-15 Democrat to 21-11 Republican. In Ohio, Republicans managed to put a referendum banning gay marriage on the 2004 ballot, ramping up evangelical turnout and securing a crucial state for President Bush. And in the Senate, the Republican “nuclear option” would have lowered the bar for conservative judges’ confirmation to a one-vote margin.
In each case, Republicans were acting within the rules; even Delay’s questionable redistricting plan was upheld by the Supreme Court. So railing against the GOP’s “dirty tricks” is clearly counterproductive; we ought just to be aware that convincing your fellow lawmakers to change the rules in your favor is often a lot easier than convincing your constituents you’re right. With that in mind, we liberals need to work on our skills of anticipation, because acting sooner always beats whining later.
Thus it is that I direct your attention to the Joint Resolution for Annexing Texas to the United States, approved by Congress on March 1, 1845. Remember that Texas, for nine years after defeating Mexico at the Battle of San Jacinto, officially existed as an independent republic. Annexation took so long, in part, because of the difficulty of the slavery issue: Adding another slave state, and such a large one, would upset the Union’s balance. And so annexation had to wait until Congress agreed on the following compromise:
Though the rationale for the state-splitting compromise has disappeared, the Joint Resolution remains, to my knowledge, the State of Texas’s founding document. Thus, Texans can still choose at any time to balkanize themselves.
Of course, the four prospective new states would still have to be admitted to the Union “under the provisions of the Federal Constitution”; and here the relevant passage is Article IV, Section 3:
Therefore, with the approval of the state legislature and both houses of Congress, Texas can at any time resolve itself into five states, each with their own congressional representation.
Representation in the House and the Electoral College, both of which are linked to population, would most likely remain unchanged. But, crucially, a breakup would enable Texans to increase their number of Senators from two to 10—the current two plus two each for four new states. And it goes without saying that this instant eight-seat pickup would be almost entirely Republican.
Would the necessary resolutions pass? It seems likely—a breakup is in the interest of every party involved. True, the state of Texas would lose some biggest-state-in-the-continental-US and whole-other-country cachet, but a five-fold increase in power on the national stage would easily compensate. And for congressional Republicans, the vote would be a no-brainer—a vote to place themselves in a permanent majority. With the rewards so rich, any Republican holdouts could easily be characterized as traitors to their party’s best interests.
Not even the most optimistic forecasts show Democrats winning back the Senate by more than one or two seats in November. The prospect of eight more Republicans (who would presumably take office in a series of rolling special elections over the next two or three cycles) would put the chamber out of play for the foreseeable future and place Democrats at a severe strategic disadvantage, forced to win every tight race in perpetuity just to stay competitive. And the guaranteed Republican majority would keep the original state-splitting resolution from being repealed any time soon.
But the GOP must act now. As the polls now stand, Republicans have only until the current Congress expires to get the ball rolling while they are still in the majority. If the political forecast doesn’t change drastically, and very soon, look for Karl Rove to reveal his Doomsday Device within the next month. And remember that you read it here first.
With the midterm elections approaching, Republican strategists are busily searching for a way to avert disaster in the 70-some days remaining. Obviously, anything to do with terrorism helps: The foiling of the British airline plot brought President Bush’s approval ratings, uninvolved as he was, to a six-week high. Painting Democrats as cutting-and-running cowards has been a perennial fallback, as has the specter of Speaker Nancy Pelosi leading a frivolous impeachment investigation.
But while these tried-and-true tropes may yet win the battle of ideas, Republicans also know that nothing confers an advantage like procedural skullduggery. Tom Delay’s off-year redistricting in Texas ousted four Democratic congressmen and helped turn the state’s congressional delegation from 17-15 Democrat to 21-11 Republican. In Ohio, Republicans managed to put a referendum banning gay marriage on the 2004 ballot, ramping up evangelical turnout and securing a crucial state for President Bush. And in the Senate, the Republican “nuclear option” would have lowered the bar for conservative judges’ confirmation to a one-vote margin.
In each case, Republicans were acting within the rules; even Delay’s questionable redistricting plan was upheld by the Supreme Court. So railing against the GOP’s “dirty tricks” is clearly counterproductive; we ought just to be aware that convincing your fellow lawmakers to change the rules in your favor is often a lot easier than convincing your constituents you’re right. With that in mind, we liberals need to work on our skills of anticipation, because acting sooner always beats whining later.
Thus it is that I direct your attention to the Joint Resolution for Annexing Texas to the United States, approved by Congress on March 1, 1845. Remember that Texas, for nine years after defeating Mexico at the Battle of San Jacinto, officially existed as an independent republic. Annexation took so long, in part, because of the difficulty of the slavery issue: Adding another slave state, and such a large one, would upset the Union’s balance. And so annexation had to wait until Congress agreed on the following compromise:
New States of convenient size not exceeding four in number, in addition to said State of Texas and having sufficient population, may, hereafter by the consent of said State, be formed out of the territory thereof, which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions of the Federal Constitution; and such states as may be formed out of the territory lying south of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude, commonly known as the Missouri Compromise Line, shall be admitted into the Union, with or without slavery, as the people of each state, asking admission shall desire; and in such State or States as shall be formed out of said territory, north of said Missouri Compromise Line, slavery, or involuntary servitude (except for crime) shall be prohibited.
Though the rationale for the state-splitting compromise has disappeared, the Joint Resolution remains, to my knowledge, the State of Texas’s founding document. Thus, Texans can still choose at any time to balkanize themselves.
Of course, the four prospective new states would still have to be admitted to the Union “under the provisions of the Federal Constitution”; and here the relevant passage is Article IV, Section 3:
New states may be admitted by the Congress into this union; but no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress.
Therefore, with the approval of the state legislature and both houses of Congress, Texas can at any time resolve itself into five states, each with their own congressional representation.
Representation in the House and the Electoral College, both of which are linked to population, would most likely remain unchanged. But, crucially, a breakup would enable Texans to increase their number of Senators from two to 10—the current two plus two each for four new states. And it goes without saying that this instant eight-seat pickup would be almost entirely Republican.
Would the necessary resolutions pass? It seems likely—a breakup is in the interest of every party involved. True, the state of Texas would lose some biggest-state-in-the-continental-US and whole-other-country cachet, but a five-fold increase in power on the national stage would easily compensate. And for congressional Republicans, the vote would be a no-brainer—a vote to place themselves in a permanent majority. With the rewards so rich, any Republican holdouts could easily be characterized as traitors to their party’s best interests.
Not even the most optimistic forecasts show Democrats winning back the Senate by more than one or two seats in November. The prospect of eight more Republicans (who would presumably take office in a series of rolling special elections over the next two or three cycles) would put the chamber out of play for the foreseeable future and place Democrats at a severe strategic disadvantage, forced to win every tight race in perpetuity just to stay competitive. And the guaranteed Republican majority would keep the original state-splitting resolution from being repealed any time soon.
But the GOP must act now. As the polls now stand, Republicans have only until the current Congress expires to get the ball rolling while they are still in the majority. If the political forecast doesn’t change drastically, and very soon, look for Karl Rove to reveal his Doomsday Device within the next month. And remember that you read it here first.
posted by Rob Goodman at 11:57 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home