GOP: The party of big gubmint

So Republicans believe in local control over local issues, right? Keep government small, don’t meddle in local affairs, maintain private property rights, that sort of thing, right? I haven’t been misinformed on that point, have I?

I wonder because of three big news items today that seem to contradict that claim...

1. Congressman Tom Davis (R-VA) proposed a bill in committee today that would, among other things, require WMATA to add two seats to it’s board for federal appointees. In all fairness the proposed bill, which is expected to pass, has a lot of positive attributes, but inserting federal appointees onto a local government body reeks of, well, fascism.


2. A rider attached to that same bill by Mr. Davis stipulates that WMATA can’t sell a specific piece of property in Fairfax County. Davis, who lives nearby the property in question, doesn’t want to see it sold because he is hoping to scuttle a large development planned to take place adjacent to the Vienna Metro station. Beyond the fact that the development can still go forward without that property (and will generate more congestion without it than with it), and beyond the obvious conflict of interest, much more serious accusations have surfaced.


3. Citing vague security concerns, the Senate overturned District zoning in order to block a proposed office building on Capitol Hill. Apparently, the threat that a sniper could go up on the roof and shoot at people is so grave that Congress feels it must impinge property rights to protect itself. Nevermind that there are several other taller buildings nearby with even better sightlines of the Capitol.

Individually these sorts of actions aren't that big of a deal, but collectively and with others in recent memory they illustrate a major policy shift in the Republican party. No longer the party of personal rights, small government or fiscal responsibility, just what does the GOP stand for nowadays anyway?

Tags: politics urbanism