Reps. Reflect on 108th
By Ken St. Onge
WASHINGTON Oct. 22 – Two years ago, newly-elected Rep. Jeb. Bradley (R-N.H.) came to Washington with four priorities—terrorism, the economy, veterans’ benefits and affordable heath care. Some of the issues have been addressed he thinks. Others will await the next Congress.
The tax cut package passed in September was the most significant accomplishment of the entire 108 th Congress, the former small business owner said in an interview Wednesday.
“I think the fact that we passed the stimulus plan was a really big accomplishment in terms of helping us to grow jobs,” Bradley said. “It was hard to get it through but it was well worth it, certainly from my visits around the state.”
Bradley, who is a member of the House Armed Services committee, also listed a few lower profile items as personal legislative victories—provisions to increase military pay and reduce out of pocket housing costs, an increase in funding for veterans’ health care and authorization of an increase of 20,000 troops.
“Between the armed services bill and homeland security,” Bradley said, “the Congress is addressing the threats that face our nation.”
But some feel that the Congress may not be addressing other issues.
“I don’t think this Congress will be judged very well by history,” Brookings Institute Senior Fellow Sarah Binder said.
“Although quite a number of ‘big things’ were done in 2003, Congress deadlocked on a number of major measures towards the end of 2004,” she said. “Given that this was a period of unified Republican control of the White House and Congress, historians will reasonably have expected a bit more success in addressing major issues of the day.”
Future historians, reflecting on the 108 th Congress, might look at two bills in particular—the expansion of Medicare and the tax cut package—Binder said, noting that Medicare bill’s passage was “extremely contentious and was largely opposed by Democrats and even some Republicans.”
Looking back, another congressman, Rep. Martin Meehan (D-Lowell), said he is not sure there were any significant accomplishments.
“This wasn’t a do-nothing Congress,” Meehan said in an Oct. 14 interview. “It was a do-harm Congress. I don’t think there were many accomplishments—few and far between. The successes were a handful of things.”
Among that handful Meehan, also a member of the Armed Services Committee, said he is most proud of are provisions to reimburse families who had purchased body armor for troops overseas, and bills to prevent torture on military installations.
He also said securing economic development funding for the area, including $1.5 million for Gateway Project, $175,000 for the Lawrence Boys and Girls Club and $100,000 for Lawrence General Hospital, was a major personal accomplishment.
Although this Congress has not officially adjourned—the intelligence bill has yet to pass and a “lame-duck” session following the Nov. 2 election is likely—a number of priorities remain for the 109 th Congress. What those priorities are may depend less on who is elected to Congress and more on who is elected president.
“If Bush is re-elected,” Binder said, “we should see more of the same: GOP efforts to reduce taxes, reign in malpractice, reduce class-action law suits, and so forth. If Kerry is elected, domestic issues, like jobs, wages, the economy and health care, are likely to rise to the top. How either party will maneuver given increasing deficits is difficult to see.”
Bradley said that, if re-elected, his priorities would be economic development and medical liability reform.
“Clearly it will depend on who wins the presidency,” he said. “But I wouldn’t even be able to speculate in terms of what it might mean.”
Meehan, who plans to focus on providing health care if re-elected, agreed that the direction of the next Congress will depend significantly on the outcome of the presidential election.
“A fear I have is control by one political party in the House, Senate and Presidency,” he said. “We need more checks and balances. I think Kerry will win, but I would be concerned with a lack of checks and balances with one party controlling the entire government.”
###
