by Robert D. Novak
Dysfunctional House GOP
October 04, 2006 10:32 PM EST
WASHINGTON -- After it was learned that Rep. Mark Foley had dispatched an inappropriate e-mail message to a 16-year-old male former page, the House Republican leadership was still urging him to seek re-election from his Florida district. He agreed. It was a success that surely will cost the Republicans Foley's seat in Congress and perhaps control of the House for the first time since the 1994 election.
A member of the House leadership told me that Foley, under continuous political pressure because of his sexual orientation, was considering not seeking a seventh term this year but that Rep. Tom Reynolds, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), talked him into running. Reynolds confirmed that he did urge Foley, as he urged nearly all incumbents who had not made up their minds, to run again. Yet, the questionable e-mails -- not the subsequently revealed explicit instant messages -- had been known to House GOP authorities long before Foley decided to run.
While Democratic accusations of an intentional Republican
cover-up are clearly without substance, the Foley affair points to a
divided, disorganized House leadership. The gap between Reynolds and Speaker
Dennis Hastert is wide. The image of a dysfunctional House GOP is underlined
by Hastert asserting that "I just don't recall or remember" Reynolds calling
Foley's e-mail to his attention "this spring." These are leaders who operate
in secret and have trouble communicating with one another.
Dealing with Foley was complicated because he was a known,
though never a self-proclaimed, homosexual. A desire not to be accused of
gay-bashing may have influenced party leaders to set aside the e-mail that
the former page described as "sick, sick, sick."
Foley's e-mail was uncovered as early as last November. The
boy's congressional sponsor in Louisiana, Rep. Rodney Alexander, notified
the clerk of the House, who informed Rep. John Shimkus of Illinois, head of
the board that oversees pages. Staffers set at mid-April the time when
Reynolds went to Hastert.
At this point, Foley was talking about a 2006 Senate candidacy
(after his aborted Senate race in 2004) but was discouraged by White House
aides who viewed him as unelectable. According to House sources, Foley was
then considering retirement from Congress.
The NRCC regarded the sprawling 16th congressional district as
safe Republican territory easily carried by a new candidate. Foley received
68 percent of the vote in 2004 (with George W. Bush winning there for
re-election by eight percentage points). There was plenty of time for a
substitute with Foley not filing for re-election until May 8.
Even though the sexually explicit messages sent to other former
pages in 2003 and 2004 were not yet known, this was the time to ease out
Foley. But Reynolds indicated to me he urged him to stay, in hopes of
keeping non-incumbent districts to a minimum. Until the Foley scandal broke,
Reynolds was being heralded by Republicans as a savior whose astute
managerial skills improved prospects for keeping the House.
Late last Friday afternoon on the House floor, as Congress
prepared to adjourn until after the midterm elections, unhappy Republican
members speculated about a campaign plot hatched by Democrats and the
liberal news media. It came, they grumbled, just as prospects were looking
up for the GOP with a burst of legislative activity (including passage of a
border protection bill).
But by this week, Republicans were turning on their own leaders
with difficult questions. Why did the unusual attention paid to teenage boys
by a homosexual man not flash warning signals? Why did Shimkus not alert his
Democratic counterpart on the page board, Rep. Dale Kildee of Michigan?
Above all, why was Foley urged to run again?
These questions are being asked by not only rank-and-file House
members but by elected members of the leadership. Indeed, Hastert, Majority
Leader John Boehner and Majority Whip Roy Blunt all were acting disjointedly
as the scandal broke this week (with Boehner publicly declaring it was the
speaker's responsibility). The failure of the 109th Congress to satisfy the
Republican conservative base seems linked to failure to deal effectively
with Mark Foley.
Dysfunctional House GOP
October 04, 2006 10:32 PM EST
WASHINGTON -- After it was learned that Rep. Mark Foley had dispatched an inappropriate e-mail message to a 16-year-old male former page, the House Republican leadership was still urging him to seek re-election from his Florida district. He agreed. It was a success that surely will cost the Republicans Foley's seat in Congress and perhaps control of the House for the first time since the 1994 election.
A member of the House leadership told me that Foley, under continuous political pressure because of his sexual orientation, was considering not seeking a seventh term this year but that Rep. Tom Reynolds, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), talked him into running. Reynolds confirmed that he did urge Foley, as he urged nearly all incumbents who had not made up their minds, to run again. Yet, the questionable e-mails -- not the subsequently revealed explicit instant messages -- had been known to House GOP authorities long before Foley decided to run.
While Democratic accusations of an intentional Republican
cover-up are clearly without substance, the Foley affair points to a
divided, disorganized House leadership. The gap between Reynolds and Speaker
Dennis Hastert is wide. The image of a dysfunctional House GOP is underlined
by Hastert asserting that "I just don't recall or remember" Reynolds calling
Foley's e-mail to his attention "this spring." These are leaders who operate
in secret and have trouble communicating with one another.
Dealing with Foley was complicated because he was a known,
though never a self-proclaimed, homosexual. A desire not to be accused of
gay-bashing may have influenced party leaders to set aside the e-mail that
the former page described as "sick, sick, sick."
Foley's e-mail was uncovered as early as last November. The
boy's congressional sponsor in Louisiana, Rep. Rodney Alexander, notified
the clerk of the House, who informed Rep. John Shimkus of Illinois, head of
the board that oversees pages. Staffers set at mid-April the time when
Reynolds went to Hastert.
At this point, Foley was talking about a 2006 Senate candidacy
(after his aborted Senate race in 2004) but was discouraged by White House
aides who viewed him as unelectable. According to House sources, Foley was
then considering retirement from Congress.
The NRCC regarded the sprawling 16th congressional district as
safe Republican territory easily carried by a new candidate. Foley received
68 percent of the vote in 2004 (with George W. Bush winning there for
re-election by eight percentage points). There was plenty of time for a
substitute with Foley not filing for re-election until May 8.
Even though the sexually explicit messages sent to other former
pages in 2003 and 2004 were not yet known, this was the time to ease out
Foley. But Reynolds indicated to me he urged him to stay, in hopes of
keeping non-incumbent districts to a minimum. Until the Foley scandal broke,
Reynolds was being heralded by Republicans as a savior whose astute
managerial skills improved prospects for keeping the House.
Late last Friday afternoon on the House floor, as Congress
prepared to adjourn until after the midterm elections, unhappy Republican
members speculated about a campaign plot hatched by Democrats and the
liberal news media. It came, they grumbled, just as prospects were looking
up for the GOP with a burst of legislative activity (including passage of a
border protection bill).
But by this week, Republicans were turning on their own leaders
with difficult questions. Why did the unusual attention paid to teenage boys
by a homosexual man not flash warning signals? Why did Shimkus not alert his
Democratic counterpart on the page board, Rep. Dale Kildee of Michigan?
Above all, why was Foley urged to run again?
These questions are being asked by not only rank-and-file House
members but by elected members of the leadership. Indeed, Hastert, Majority
Leader John Boehner and Majority Whip Roy Blunt all were acting disjointedly
as the scandal broke this week (with Boehner publicly declaring it was the
speaker's responsibility). The failure of the 109th Congress to satisfy the
Republican conservative base seems linked to failure to deal effectively
with Mark Foley.
