Funny what a couple of years and an international debacle will do to one’s political perspective. In 2002, the White House told Republicans to make the war in Iraq the centerpiece of congressional campaigns everywhere. In 2004, Republicans in Congress don’t want anything to do with the war and are hinting that Bush is on his own.
One day after his party’s second straight special election loss, National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Tom Reynolds (N.Y.) sought to distance House Republicans from the Iraq war, saying that any war-related drag on President Bush will not hamper downballot GOP candidates.
“Iraq is a discussion that will be done by presidential candidates — House Republicans will focus on kitchen-table issues,” the New York Republican told reporters at a briefing Tuesday. “My colleagues have not seen a ‘coattail’ election, nor will they see one in 2004.”
It’s hard to believe the chairman of the RNCC would say this out loud.
For thousands of families across the country with friends and relatives in harm’s way, too many of whom have already lost loved ones, the war is very much a “kitchen table” issue. Moreover, lawmakers approved this war and are paying the bills; leaving the “discussion” to presidential candidates is an abdication of responsibility.
And finally, it wasn’t long ago when Bush’s alleged “coattails” were the only thing the GOP could count on. It speaks volumes that the NRCC no longer believes they exist.
On a purely pragmatic level, Reynolds’ assertion that Iraq won’t/shouldn’t be an issue of congressional campaigns seems strangely naïve for the chairman of the NRCC. Whether he likes it or not, Iraq is dominating the political landscape and voters have questions that demand answers — not just from Bush and Kerry, but from their representatives in Congress.
Ultimately, if Reynolds and the NRCC want to run a “What war?” campaign, I’m delighted. Let’s see how well that strategy works on Election Day.