Losing Is Winning

When the Republicans gained control of the House of Representatives after the 1994 midterm elections，passing a balancedbudget amendment to the U.S.Constitution was tops on their legislative agenda.Republicans had long criticized Democrats for profligate government spending and high deficits.Getting a constitutional amendment to require a balanced budget would be a powerful legal weapon they could use to cut government programs drastically.Early in 1995，it looked like both houses of Congress would pass the budget amendment easily.As time got closer to a Senate vote in March，however，the Republicans didn't seem to have the 67 votes necessary to pass a constitutional amendment.Senator Bob Dole，the Republican majority leader，kept postponing the vote，hoping to pick up more support，but eventually he brought the bill to a vote without having 67 votes lined up.Why would he bring the matter to a vote，knowing that the Republicans would fail to pass it?On the eve of the vote，he explained，“We really win if we win，but we may also win if we lose.”

After the vote，the headlines were unanimous:“Senate Rejects Amendment on Balancing the Budget;Close Vote Is Blow to GOP，”went The New York Times'verdict.“GOP is Loser on Budget Amendment，”echoed The Boston Globe.What did Dole mean by claiming that a loss could be a victory?(https://www.daowen.com)

Politicians always have at least two goals.First is a policy goal—whatever program or proposal they would like to see accomplished or defeated，whatever problem they would like to see solved.Perhaps even more important，though，is a political goal.Politicians always want to preserve their power，or gain enough power，to be able to accomplish their policy goals.Even though a defeat of the balanced-budget amendment was a loss for Republicans'policy goal，Dole thought it might be a gain for Republicans'political strength.(So，apparently，did The New York Times，whose sub-headline read“Risk to Democrats”.)Republican leaders acknowledged that they had lost a constitutional device that would have helped them immensely in redeeming their campaign pledge to enact the“Contract with America”.But they also saw some important political gains.Senator Orrin Hatch，the chief sponsor of the amendment，called the vote“a clear delineation between the parties”.A Republican pollster explained how the vote might help Republican candidates in the next Congressional election:“It lays out the differences as sharply as we could want them:We want to cut spending，and they don't.”Dole，already campaigning for the presidency，used the occasion to lambaste President Clinton for“abdicating his responsibility”to control federal deficits，while Republicans in both houses talked about making Democrats pay at the polls in the next election.“As far as I'm concerned，”Newt Gingrich crowed，“it's like a fork in chess.They can give us a victory today;they can give us a victory in November 1996.”