SMALL GOVERNMENT CONSERVATIVES HAVE REVOLTED against President Bush and the Republican leadership of the Senate and the House. Their goal, with hurricane recovery costs soaring, is what it's always been: to hold down spending and restrain the growth of government. It is an impossible dream or close to impossible. The small government brigade is a distinct minority in Congress. Their strength is outside Congress. They reflect the anxiety of the Republican party's base, conservatives and moderates both, over the uncontrolled spending and massive expansion of government following hurricane Katrina. "The base is killing us," a Republican senator says.

There's another source of strength for small government conservatives. One congressional Republican says an old adage of Newt Gingrich is applicable: Never assume that anybody is organized or there's a grand plan that's in effect. The president is concentrated on emergency relief and recovery in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. Congress is in disarray. But small government conservatives do have a plan--actually two plans--for paying for a portion of the hurricane costs by offsetting spending cuts.

In the House, the conservative Republican Study Committee proposed "budget options" that would cut spending by as much as $102 billion in one year. The RSC scheme would delay the start of the Medicare prescription drug benefit, scheduled for January 1, for at least one year. Led by Republican representative Mike Pence of Indiana, RSC leaders met last week with Josh Bolten, the White House budget director, and with House Republican leaders, who rejected their plan as politically unrealistic, which

In the Senate, six Republicans offered a series of "options to save spending by reducing non-defense spending growth." By merely freezing discretionary spending--that means everything but entitlements--for a single year, $47.9 billion would be saved. Limiting the freeze to non-defense, non-homeland security spending would still save $36.2 billion, according to Senator John Sununu of New Hampshire. "If Congress simply put in place mechanisms to control the growth of discretionary spending at or near inflation, the two-year cost savings is well in excess of $20 billion," Sununu says. Slowing the growth of spending in such ways is more realistic.

The resentment felt by the small government conservatives antedates Katrina and the current argument over spending on relief and recovery. They have a philosophical difference with the president and with their own leaders in Congress. They favor sharply limited government and minimal spending. Bush and his congressional allies prefer a more expansive role for government and worry less about increased spending. Bush has been called a big government conservative (by me), but that label is inapt because it implies he's a liberal. He's not, but neither is he a small government conservative.

A series of expensive measures championed by Bush and passed by Congress--the farm, highway, and energy bills, for instance--has caused the anger of small government conservatives to simmer. In the House, 25 Republicans voted against the Medicare drug benefit in 2003, nearly prompting its defeat and alienating the White House and party leaders in Congress. Nonetheless, most of the 25 remain proud of their "no" vote. Sununu voted against the Medicare, energy, highway, and farm bills. Yet he's been skillful in maintaining his ties to the White House and Senate leaders.