Opinion: GOP speakers have short lifespan


“You all know that I did not seek this job,” House Speaker Paul Ryan reminded the country in announcing his retirement. “I took it reluctantly.”

Three years ago, Ryan had indeed been adamant, refusing to drink from the poisoned chalice of becoming a GOP speaker. He relented, but only after being begged to do so by fellow Republicans, who told him that party loyalty and patriotism gave him no choice.

Ryan’s reluctance was well-earned. As a college student, his first involvement in politics had been as a campaign volunteer for John Boehner, and once in Congress himself he had watched as Speaker Boehner was badgered endlessly by Republican purists. Boehner was by any measure a conservative, but to many in the GOP caucus he wasn’t mean enough or confrontational enough. Eventually, Boehner grew so tired of the intra-party backstabbing and his party’s inability to govern that he just woke up one morning and quit, proclaiming it one of the happiest days of his life.

Prior to Boehner, the chalice had been handed to Speaker Denny Hastert, who had also failed to turn the House GOP into a body capable of handling the responsibilities of government. “I continue to worry about the breakdown of civility in our political discourse,” Hastert told lawmakers as he said goodbye in 2011. “When I addressed this chamber for the first time as your speaker, I noted that solutions to problems cannot be found in a pool of bitterness. Those words are as true today as they were then.”

And before Hastert, there had been House Speaker Newt Gingrich. When he resigned as speaker in 1999, also because he was under attack by those in his own party, Gingrich told fellow Republicans that he was leaving because he was “not willing to preside over people who are cannibals,” a complaint that was rich with irony.

Five years earlier, Gingrich himself had ridden to power by undermining longtime Republican leader Bob Michel, whom Gingrich attacked as craven and weak. In his own farewell address, Michel had lamented the influence of those who would rather pick a fight than pass a bill, a reference aimed right at Gingrich.

“Michel understands that politics is not war, it is an alternative to war,” as one observer wrote at the time. “It is knowing what is possible and what isn’t. It is give and take, not divide and conquer. And in a group as diverse as the House, compromise is likely to produce more in the long run than confrontation.”

Boehner, notorious as a smoker and defender of the tobacco industry, this week announced that he had joined the advisory board of Acreage Holdings, a major marijuana-growing company, and would lobby Congress to legalize the drug at the federal level. Hastert was released last year from federal prison, after confessing to sexual abuse of young boys during his previous career as teacher and coach. And these days, Gingrich is ranting like a madman on Fox News, likening the FBI and the Justice Department to Stalin and the Gestapo in their investigation into President Trump.

What Gingrich gave us, what has crippled our government ever since and made the role of Republican leadership impossible, is the notion that compromise equates to surrender, that those who disagree are not merely wrong but evil, that no rules of civility apply and that politics is not just war but a war to destroy or be destroyed. It has poisoned our democracy, and it has turned politics into a cesspool into which too many men and women of good will are choosing not to wade any longer.



Reader Comments ...


Next Up in Opinion

Opinion: Trump isn’t first president to cozy up to Putin

WASHINGTON — The definition of insanity is doing the same thing again and again and expecting to get a different result, which is one of the many reasons President Trump’s news conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin seemed so insane. Trump is trying to do something that both of his immediate predecessors tried to do: turn over...
Opinion: ‘Sort of a double negative’

It is an unfathomable proposition that the day would ever come when America could rightly question the loyalties of its own president, but that is precisely where we have arrived. Donald Trump’s “Surrender Summit” with President Vladimir Putin of Russia was such a disloyal, traitorous display that it boggles the mind. Russia attacked...
READERS WRITE: JULY 20

Trump did ask re: meddling, Putin said ‘no’ So Donald Trump was told to ask Putin about Russian involvement in the 2016 elections. Well, Trump did ask, and Putin denied any involvement. Putin kind of chuckled when asked because he knows the Democrats are dividing the country over these fake accusations. This is the time to show the world...
Opinion: Two cheers for democratic socialists

WASHINGTON — “Socialism has known increments of success, basic failure and massive betrayal. Yet it is more relevant to the humane construction of the twenty-first century than any other idea.” With those words, the late Michael Harrington began his book “Socialism,” published in 1972. In his day, Harrington was often...
Opinion: Trump calls off Cold War II

Beginning his joint press conference with Vladimir Putin, President Trump declared that U.S. relations with Russia have “never been worse.” He then added pointedly, that just changed “about four hours ago.” It certainly did. With his remarks in Helsinki and at the NATO summit in Brussels, Trump has signaled a historic shift...
More Stories