COLUMN RIGHT : A Grand Old Party, in Two Parts : One side stands for reform, the other for reelection. The split may become permanent.

The ongoing fracas over the budget and tax policy has revealed to the public what insiders have long known: there are two different Republican parties. Until now, they have managed to get along, at least in public. But the tax question has sent them after each other’s throats, creating an open split that may become permanent.

The two groups are the Reform Republicans and the Party Republicans. The Reform Republicans put their agenda above loyalty to the party institution. That agenda has two parts. In policy, it visualizes an America made prosperous through a revitalized free market, which requires big cuts in taxes and reduced government spending and absorption of capital through borrowing.

Reform Republicans see the deficit and Gramm-Rudman as opportunities, not dangers. They would use them as leverage to reduce federal spending and borrowing through a total freeze on spending (including entitlements) or by letting the Gramm-Rudman ceilings take effect. Reform Republicans see the rising tide of anger at Washington now manifesting itself across the country, and want to run as critics of the Establishment, not members of it.

Party Republicans have fundamentally different perceptions. They have no real policy agenda; their focus instead is on “making deals.” They are process men, concerned much more with keeping things on an even keel than with pushing any particular set of policies. They seek harmony between the Congress and the President, looking to the White House for leadership and guidance; they are uncomfortable with partisanship, and they find any public bloodletting distasteful. “No new taxes” has little policy or political importance in the their eyes, especially when compared with the need to make a deal, and they view Gramm-Rudman as a grave danger, not an opportunity to reduce the size of government dramatically.

Politically, the Party Republicans are establishmentarians. Their “real world” lies inside the beltway, and their political barometers are the White House, Wall Street and one another. They have little feel for what is happening back in Kansas, and not much interest in it either. They have no ambition to become a majority party in the House; reelection of incumbents (themselves), not party growth, is their goal.

When House Republican whip Newt Gingrich announced his opposition to the budget deal, the Reform Republicans crossed their Rubicon. Now, if they go back to the sort of “deal for a deal’s sake” the Party Republicans want, they will find they have alienated their own base. Having put their agenda above their party loyalty once, they will find they must consistently do so or shatter and turn upon themselves.

Where does this leave the Republican Party? The Reform Republicans are right in sensing a growing wave of popular indignation against politicians. Their populist, “outsider” message could enable the party to ride this wave to power. Politicians who in effect come out against themselves with support for measures like term limitation can still be credible with the public.

But the Republicans most visible to the public through the budget fiasco have been the Party Republicans. They come across like what they are, professional politicians without an agenda beyond staying in office, and the public reaction has been strongly negative. They represent the Establishment of wealth and privilege that average Americans have come to resent deeply. Not only are they out of touch with their constituents, the constituents know they are out of touch with them.

Their image shaped by the Party Republicans, Republican incumbents may take a severe drubbing in November. In the long run, that could be good for the party, because it could open the door to ascendancy of the Reform Republicans, who have far greater potential public appeal. But there is also a danger that the public will not be able to distinguish clearly between Reform and Party Republicans, and will slaughter both indiscriminately.

The challenge facing Reform Republicans at this point is getting their difference from Party Republicans across to their constituents. The next proposed “deal” on the budget should give them another opportunity to do so. But the hour is late, and courage may be waning. Will the Reformers see that their only hope lies in separation? We will soon find out.