Can-Do Congress Vexes GOP Leaders

WASHINGTON —  Here on Capitol Hill, it’s suddenly beginning to look like a do-something Congress. But for the Republican members who lead the House and Senate, that is not entirely a good thing: They don’t like a lot of the things being done.

Relaxing the U.S. embargo on Cuba. Closing campaign finance loopholes. Giving doctors the right to bargain collectively with HMOs. Funding a lawsuit against big tobacco companies.

Congress has moved on all those issues and more over the last few busy weeks--all in spite of the bitter objections of GOP leaders.

The success of these initiatives is a reflection in part of the difficulty these leaders have controlling the House and Senate with very narrow majorities. But it also reflects the tension between the conservative positions that are the staple of the GOP’s national policy and the local political needs of individual Republicans fighting to keep their seats in this year’s bitterly contested congressional elections.

For example:

* GOP leaders reluctantly accepted a compromise to allow limited direct trade with Cuba under pressure from farm-state Republicans, including Rep. George R. Nethercutt Jr. of Washington, one of their most vulnerable members.

* A rebellion among moderate Republicans from the Northeast was behind last week’s surprising vote on the first change in campaign finance law in decades, a measure that would force disclosure of secret donors to a newly popular brand of political committee.

* House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) swallowed his objections and allowed the doctors’ labor bill to pass early Friday to fulfill a personal promise to Rep. Tom Campbell (R-San Jose), who is running an uphill campaign against Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).

This sudden burst of legislative activity has challenged the perception, touted by Democrats, that Republicans are running a do-nothing Congress. It also underscores how much the legislative agenda in the coming months will be shaped as much by the political desires of individual lawmakers as by any grand ideological design.

“It’s a normal election-year dynamic: Vulnerable incumbents first take care of themselves,” said Marshall Wittmann, an analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation. “One thing politicians will put ahead of party loyalty is self-preservation.”

Tony Rudy, a top aide to House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Texas), acknowledged that GOP leaders have been forced to make concessions on some bills recently. But he added that the larger goal for the leaders is to keep the party together on big issues, such as the annual budget battle with the Clinton administration, and to do what it takes to get enough Republicans reelected this fall to keep the party in control of Congress.

“Sometimes you have to throw some bones to groups of members,” said Rudy. “He’s doing everything he can to protect members.”

Both parties were trying to put their own spin on Congress’ midyear record as lawmakers took their weeklong July 4 recess. After months of gridlock and legislative lethargy, the pace picked up in recent weeks, with lawmakers working until midnight day after day. Most of the work was on the appropriation bills needed to finance the government, including an $11.2-billion midyear spending bill that cleared the Senate on Thursday. It would provide money for a major anti-narcotics initiative in Colombia, the U.S. peacekeeping mission in Kosovo and aid for victims of recent natural diasters.

Republicans have managed to stick together on many signature issues, such as repealing the estate tax, which passed the House recently. GOP leaders also have held their troops in line behind the party’s versions of legislation to provide a Medicare prescription drug benefit and to regulate managed health care--measures that strategists hope will make it harder for Democrats to run against Republicans on those issues this fall.

Democrats said that much of the recent legislative activity is more apparent than real, expressing doubt that many of the bills in play will ever become law. Still, all but 10 House Republicans voted last month for the GOP Medicare drug bill and, in the Senate, all but four Republicans voted for the GOP alternative on managed health care.

But on other issues, Republicans have not been as disciplined. And that makes life especially difficult for GOP leaders in the House, where, if only six Republicans defect on a vote that breaks down on party lines, the GOP loses.

DeLay’s office recently sent out an urgent memo upbraiding the staffs of lawmakers who were unexpectedly absent from the floor, forcing the leadership to withdraw a bill on land management regulations because of a lack of votes.

At a time when every vote counts, many House Republicans are being pulled in different directions.

GOP leaders are no longer counting on Rep. Rick Lazio of New York to stick with them on some tough votes because, in his Senate race against First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, he is trying to shore up his credentials as a moderate Republican. For example, he was one of only five House Republicans to vote against a spending bill that would make controversial cuts in housing programs.

Rep. Merrill Cook (R-Utah) may also be less responsive to leadership requests to stick with the party: He just lost his seat in a bitterly contested primary election, joining Rep. Matthew G. Martinez (D-Monterey Park) as the only incumbents to fail to win renomination so far this year.

There are four House Republicans, including Lazio, who are running for the Senate. And GOP leaders are concerned that, as the election nears, they may be more inclined to be on the campaign trail than in the well of the House voting.

One of those Senate aspirants is Campbell, who had his moment in the legislative sun when the House voted for his bill to allow doctors to bargain collectively with health maintenance organizations. The top GOP leaders opposed the bill, but the measure was approved, 276 to 136.

The volatility caused by election-year dynamics also was on vivid display in recent debate over Justice Department plans to file a lawsuit against the tobacco companies. In the course of one week, the House voted against funding the lawsuit, then reversed itself and voted twice to finance it.

The tension between the official GOP line and local political concerns was particularly acute in talks that produced the House compromise measure on Cuba trade.

Leading the charge to relax the long-standing embargo to allow food and medicine sales was Nethercutt, who is facing a tough fight for reelection in his export-dependent farm district. The issue is a big part of his campaign, but it put him squarely at odds with party leaders, who are adamantly opposed to changing U.S. policy toward Cuba.

The compromise last month--allowing food and medicine exports but only under financial conditions that will limit actual sales--was designed by GOP leaders to give Nethercutt something to brag about while still letting Republican Cuban American lawmakers from Florida claim that they took the sting out of it.

As House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-Texas) put it, the aim of the negotiations was to allow both sides to “go home and take a bow.”

The measure’s ultimate fate remains uncertain. Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) reiterated his opposition to it Friday, saying: “If I can find a way to kill [it], I will.”