On September 27, 1994, the Republican minority in the House of Representatives gathered on the steps of the Capitol to unveil their agenda for the upcoming midterms. In a document signed by all but two sitting members and every non-incumbent candidate, they committed to supporting 10 specific measures in their first 100 days of the next Congress. Engineered by then-Minority Leader and soon-to-be Speaker Newt Gingrich, the Contract with America marked the first time in modern history that a congressional caucus coalesced around an explicit legislative program without direction from the White House.
It was, as they say, a different time. Almost 30 years after the Contract with America and approaching a decade since Donald Trump descended the golden escalator, Republicans have almost given up on the pretense that they're interested in legislating. In 2020, the party did not bother to update its 2016 platform, offering only a statement of continued support for then-President Trump. On Fox News this week, current Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (Calif.) offered mostly vague platitudes about what measures he might pursue if he follows in Gingrich's footsteps.
One reason for Republicans' confusion is structural. The combination of voluntary residential sorting, intentional gerrymandering, and straight-ticket voting that characterize 21st-century politics increases the incentives to appeal to existing supporters. The authors of the Contract with America assumed Republicans needed to prove to swing voters that they could be trusted with power after more than 40 years in the minority. Today, the challenge is to fire up partisans who care more about owning libs than specific policies.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Another reason is ideological. The Contract with America was the distilled product of the movement conservatism that some intellectuals now deride as the "dead consensus." The framing was borrowed from Ronald Reagan's 1988 State of the Union address, while the Heritage Foundation developed many of the actual proposals. Today's GOP is more torn between libertarian and populist tendencies on domestic policy and hawkish and restrained attitudes toward foreign affairs.
Finally, the elephant in the room is the former president and presumptive 2024 nominee himself. While much of the party leadership would prefer to move on quietly, Trump remains obsessed with vindicating his delusional but apparently sincere belief that he was cheated of victory by massive fraud — and punishing those who publicly disagree. His popularity with Republican voters makes it difficult to talk about anything else.
Still, it's worth trying to imagine what a plausible 2022 agenda might look like. To be successful, such an endeavor would have to be broad enough to attract support from different wings of the party, yet combative enough to mobilize the base. That's a tall order, but I don't think it's insurmountable. Taking the 1994 Contract as a model, accepting a certain level of vagueness about the details, and drawing liberally from proposals that elected officials and wonks have already put on the table, the result might look a bit like this:
As Republican Members of the House of Representatives and as citizens seeking to join that body, we propose not just to change its policies, but even more important, to restore the bonds of trust between the people and their elected representatives.That is why, in this era of official incompetence and bullying, we offer instead a detailed agenda for national renewal.This year's election offers the chance, after two decades of inertia, to bring to the House a new majority that will transform the way Congress works. That change would be the end of government that is too arbitrary, too ineffective, and too indifferent to threats facing the American people. It can be the beginning of a Congress that respects the values, and shares the faith, of the American family.Like Lincoln, our first Republican president, we intend to act "with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right." To restore accountability to out-of-control bureaucracies. To enforce our laws and keep our streets safe. To help us defend ourselves against challenges to the American way of life both at home and abroad. Within the first 100 days of the 118th Congress, we shall bring to the House Floor the following bills, each to be given full and open debate.1. THE PUBLIC HEALTH ACCOUNTABILITY ACTReforms to limit the CDC to its proper function advising elected officials rather than making policy, accelerating the FDA approval process for new drugs and medical technologies, and banning federal vaccine mandates for private employers. 2. THE TAKING BACK OUR STREETS ACTAn anti-crime package including increased funding for investigation and prosecution of federal crimes, including attacks on government property, funding for cities and states to hire more police officers to compensate for retirements and respond to the present crime wave, and redirecting federal funds away from "sanctuary cities" and other jurisdictions that refuse to enforce the law. 3. THE NONPROFIT RESPONSIBILITY ACTDiscourage foundations and universities from promoting radical agendas by taxing large endowments and denying federal grants, contracts, and other funds to institutions that promote racial division in their teachings or policies. 4. THE FAMILY REINFORCEMENT ACTStrengthening rights of parents in their children's education, stronger enforcement against pornography on social media, an expanded Child Tax Credit for working parents. 5. THE AMERICAN DREAM RESTORATION ACTFunding for trades and vocational education to create viable alternatives to college, limits on Federal PLUS loans and other guarantees to discourage risky borrowing and stop subsidizing expensive, useless degrees. 6. THE BORDER SECURITY RESTORATION ACTIncreased funding for Customs and Border Protection and other enforcement agencies, complete the Wall where construction has begun, build detention facilities so asylum claimants are not immediately released into the community, move toward mandatory E-Verify for all employers. 7. THE TAX FAIRNESS ACTRaise revenue by phasing out the SALT deduction and other tax provisions that benefit the wealthy and subsidize big government. 8. THE JOB CREATION AND NATIONAL SECURITY ACTCompete with China by promoting domestic manufacturing in key industries and establishing secure supply chains. Heightened oversight and penalties for companies that share intellectual property or other sensitive assets. Targeted tariffs on countries and industries that engage in unfair competition with American enterprises and workers.9. THE COMMON SENSE ETHICS ACTBan stock-trading and other financial conflicts of interest by Members of Congress,10. THE ELECTION SECURITY ACTEstablish a commission to review the 2020 election and propose measures to encourage secure, credible results in the future, including a national standard of in-person, election day voting.
A few caveats are in order. The first is that this list doesn't cover all the matters currently under debate. Instead, I've tried to restrict the program to measures that are more or less within the purview of the congressional majority. Some of these efforts might struggle in the Senate or face a veto from the White House. But that's okay. You can set the agenda even if not every proposal succeeds.
A second constraint is that I've tried to find ways to moderate tensions among Republican factions, if not entirely to resolve them. That requires splitting the difference on issues including immigration and punting on elections policy, where partisan reactions are grossly disproportionate to any real problems. The results may be a bit fuzzy and unsatisfying, but that's a risk in building any coalition.
Despite the attempt to offer concessions to the party's MAGA contingent, though, these proposals are intended to help candidates running in marginal districts, including those that supported President Biden in 2020. As Henry Olsen has argued, a GOP with no room for "RINOs" is a GOP that will struggle to win. Although it's remembered as the manifesto for the "Gingrich revolution," the 1994 Contract with America was limited to measures that enjoyed broad and often bipartisan support in polls.
If today's Republicans hope to wield legislative influence rather than eking out a majority and waiting for 2024, they would be wise to follow that example. It's entirely possible that this blueprint wouldn't be satisfying enough to enough Republican members of Congress or voters. So far, though, there's no better alternative available.
Explore More
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Samuel Goldman is a national correspondent at TheWeek.com. He is also an associate professor of political science at George Washington University, where he is executive director of the John L. Loeb, Jr. Institute for Religious Freedom and director of the Politics & Values Program. He received his Ph.D. from Harvard and was a postdoctoral fellow in Religion, Ethics, & Politics at Princeton University. His books include God's Country: Christian Zionism in America (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2018) and After Nationalism (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2021). In addition to academic research, Goldman's writing has appeared in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and many other publications.
Today's political cartoons - November 2, 2024
Geoff Capes obituary: shot-putter who became the World’s Strongest Man
Israel attacks Iran: a 'limited' retaliation
US election: who the billionaires are backing
The GOP is renewing its focus on the abortion pill
'We might need to fiddle with our technology more than we think'
US election: where things stand with one week to go
Is Trump okay?
The life and times of Kamala Harris
Will 'weirdly civil' VP debate move dial in US election?
Is Mark Robinson a GOP fluke or an inevitability of MAGA conservatism?
