The Boehner Evolution

At WSJ, "House Republicans and the challenge of divided government":

John Boehner is no Newt Gingrich, which suits the current public mood. Americans have had their fill of triumphalism and revolution in a House Speaker. But Barack Obama is also no Bill Clinton, a President with a gift for tactical politics and compromise. And therein lies the drama of the next two years as we return to divided government. We're probably destined more for gridlock than accomplishment, which after the last two years is an accomplishment itself.

***

In his press conference yesterday, Mr. Obama did not sound like someone ideologically chastened by the rout of his fellow Democrats. He said he felt "bad" for so many careers cut short, and that he was thinking about his own role in the defeat. But he rejected the thought that his own policies were to blame, save for the fact that they haven't—yet—produced an economic recovery robust enough to make everything else he did popular. His concessions to defeat, in short, were limited to a reflective personal tone, not substance.

The message we take away is that Mr. Obama will continue to press his "transformative" agenda in any way possible. Even on cap and trade—an issue that West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin literally shot in a TV ad to save his campaign—Mr. Obama said yesterday he would seek other means to accomplish the same goal of taxing carbon. We can only imagine what soon-to-be-jobless Democrats in the Coal Belt and Midwest thought of that one.

Which brings us to Mr. Boehner, who saw the Gingrich train wreck of 1995 up close as part of the leadership. He knows Republicans can't govern from the House, so his challenge will be picking the issues on which he might be able to succeed, or at least frame the agenda for the election of 2012.

This means focusing above all on policies for faster economic growth and job creation. In one sense, this is easier than it sounds: First, stop doing more harm. Merely putting an end to any new taxes or regulation will contribute to business confidence, removing the fear of new higher costs.

The immediate priority is extending the 2001 and 2003 tax rates, which expire on January 1. Democrats are already angling for some classic insider fudge, such as extending lower rates for the middle class permanently but only for a year for upper incomes and dividends. Or perhaps raising rates only on those who make $1 million or more.

The best growth policy and politics is to extend all of the lower rates permanently. Temporary tax cuts don't provide the same assurance for business investment or hiring, and the top marginal rates on income and capital investment are the ones that most affect economic growth.

Conceding the class war argument after picking up 60 or more House seats would also be a terrible signal of political weakness. If Republicans hold firm on tax cuts for everybody, they can force Mr. Obama and Senate Democrats facing re-election in 2012 to oppose an extension for the middle class simply to punish the rich. We think they will fold ...

More at the link.