Vulnerable Republicans in House break ranks on housing-rescue bill

Several vulnerable House Republicans broke ranks on the housing bill in an effort to pass major economic legislation before the fall election.

“You can’t clearly calculate a political outcome at this stage,” Rep. Phil English (R-Pa.) told The Hill of his vote for the measure. “Ironically, if the housing market improves … I will undoubtedly get some flak from taxpayers about the size of the bill.”

{mosads}After the Senate passed the bill in a Saturday session, President Bush signed the measure — one he once threatened to veto — without fanfare or formal ceremony early Wednesday morning.

English, in a tough election campaign against businesswoman Kathy Dahlkemper (D), indicated that his vote could be more helpful if the housing market continues to worsen. “Ironically, if the housing market experiences more bumps,” he said, “I think this will help.”

But English said that he voted for the bill because “enormous financial damage to the economy will occur if Fannie [Mae] and Freddie [Mac] are compromised.”

Dahlkemper called his vote political posturing. “It’s the failed policies of the English-Bush agenda that got us here in the first place,” she said in an interview. “You can try to change your track, but people in this district won’t be fooled.”

The bill passed the House last week by a 272-152 margin. On the Republican side, 45 members voted for it and 149 voted against it. In races ranked as toss-ups or leaning Republican by The Cook Political Report, eight incumbent GOPers voted for the measure.

Rep. Robin Hayes (R-N.C.) was one of the bill’s supporters. He’s facing a tough reelection contest against his 2006 opponent.

“This bill can bring desperately needed assistance to state and local governments to stabilize neighborhoods devastated by foreclosures,” he said in a statement.

Thomas Thacker, communications director for Hayes’s Democratic opponent, Larry Kissell, said, “It seems to take a close election and some close polls for Robin Hayes to do the right thing.”

A GOP source said that vulnerable House incumbents voted for the bill partially due to rising economic concerns in their districts. “The economy is something that’s on voters’ minds,” the source said. “A lot of these lawmakers wanted to get something done on the economy before the election.”

The source claimed that the “compromise language” and the removal of Bush’s veto threat made the legislation easier to stomach for some GOP members.

The source also noted that several of the lawmakers who backed the bill had voting patterns that were traditionally more independent of the party, such as Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.).

“Some Republicans are trying to win in an adverse year by breaking with their leadership. That’s politics 101,” said Cook Political Report analyst David Wasserman.

Wasserman added that “these members will likely do what is politically best for them as long as they are not the deciding vote on a controversial issue.” He identified Shays, English and Hayes, amongst others, as members who “need to watch their back” this election cycle.

Only 4 percent of registered voters responded that the mortgage and housing situation should be the government’s top priority, the last of eight issues, according to the July Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll.

But voters have ranked the economy at the top of the list in most polls.

Most GOP incumbents in competitive races still voted against the bill, sticking with the party line. These lawmakers defended their votes as an effort to protect their constituents from a “bailout” of mortgage lenders.

Michigan and Illinois rank seventh and 10th nationally in foreclosure rates, according to RealtyTrac, a foreclosure database.

But Tim Walberg (R), a freshman incumbent from Michigan, called the bill “flawed legislation.”

“Michigan taxpayers cannot afford to pay for the irresponsibility and blatant recklessness of mortgage servicers and speculators, and this legislation forces hardworking families to back up $300 billion in risky mortgage securities,” Walberg said in a statement.

“Essentially, the voters in south-central Michigan overwhelmingly agree with the congressman that the taxpayers should not bail out the lending industry,” said Walberg campaign spokesman Justin Roebuck. “It seems to reflect what people nationwide are feeling.”

“Michigan has been one of the hardest-hit areas in terms of foreclosure,” said Zack Pohl, spokesman for Walberg’s likely opponent, state Senate Minority Leader Mark Schauer (D). Walberg’s “no” vote “certainly didn’t help a lot of people in this district,” he noted.

Dan Seals (D), who is running against Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), told The Hill he was not surprised by Kirk’s vote against the housing bill. “Congressman Kirk has consistently voted against … supporting those who have been hurt by this economy.”

Kirk said in a statement that Congress was “seeking an unlimited, ‘no questions asked’ U.S. Treasury bailout of these mortgage giants” and that it was “rushed through Congress without questions.”

His staff noted a recent poll conducted by Kirk’s office that found over 76 percent of respondents said they did not support a “taxpayer bailout” of Fannie and Freddie.

Only one House Democrat in a competitive race, Nancy Boyda (Kan.), voted against the housing legislation.