More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Anna Burger

Anna Burger

Posted: February 19, 2010 03:02 PM

With Senator Evan Bayh's surprise announcement that he would not seek reelection because of "too much partisanship and not enough progress" this week, there's a Greek chorus decrying the inability of the parties to work together as evidence of a failed system. His abdication was widely read as proof positive that Washington cannot solve the problems that Americans face every day and that bipartisanship is the solution.

But is bipartisanship a means or an end? And is bipartisanship really the reason Bayh and others were sent to Washington?

A growing number of us are stepping forward to say no.

Don't get me wrong: the American people want and need the best ideas from both parties. They want to see Congress have an honest debate on those ideas, vote on those ideas and pass bills that reflect those "best" ideas.

But make no mistake about it: Americans are deeply invested in results.

Just look at the polls. Americans want their elected leaders to work together but not at the expense of governing. The reality is Americans really want solutions that will save their jobs, their homes -- their security.

Bipartisanship can lead to great legislation, but the pursuit of compromise should not come at the expense of sound public policy and progress. And the public won't let Members of Congress hide behind bipartisanship as an excuse for not getting things done.

If the Republicans, who developed a new-found appreciation for bipartisanship around November 2008, really cared about bipartisan solutions as much as they did political gamesmanship, there would be a lot more progress made to get our country back on track.

The truth? Much of the legislation passed last year had input from both sides of the aisle. From the American Recovery and Restoration Act to jobs to healthcare, representatives from both parties worked together to craft bills that reflected the ideas of both parties.

Then what happened? The GOP voted no. They voted no on bills they helped draft. They voted no on ideas they once championed. They said no to moving this country forward.

After collaborating with the Democrats on the essential American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and contributing a number of proposals reflected in the bill, three Republican Senators gave the final bill their support. But even as the Act created and saved more than two and a half million jobs throughout 2009, Republicans in Congress did all they could to discredit it. The irony, of course, is that these same Republicans showed up at a number of ribbon cuttings in their districts to celebrate the creation of good jobs they voted against.

Then you have the upcoming jobs bill. Contrary to Senator Bayh's example of stalled progress, the bill that Majority Leader Reid will take to the Floor on Monday is a100% bipartisan bill. What about the Baucus-Grassley proposal that Bayh criticized for not being brought up? Well, every single piece of the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act was taken directly from it; including the main component -- the Schumer-Hatch Payroll tax exemption. He simply took out all the stuff not related to jobs; i.e. a lot of pork for corporate lobbyists. No matter the bipartisan nature of this legislation and helping to draft it, Senator Hatch has already announced he will not vote for it. Most Republicans will likely follow. Hopefully conservative Democrats will not shy away from supporting bipartisan policies simply because their Republican colleagues do.

And then there is health care. Much of the Senate bill that passed without a single Republican vote was based on the bipartisan Senate Finance Committee's bill. A bill, I might add, that was developed through months and months of negotiations with the infamous, bipartisan "Gang of 6." To the chagrin of many progressives, that bill was chock-full of Republican ideas like selling insurance across state lines but lacked core progressive ideas like a public plan option. Despite over a year of negotiations, the bill's inclusion of many of their ideas, Republicans once again chose to abandon a bill of bipartisan ideas and chose to obstruct in the hope of political gain.

And even after the President makes clear he invites their best thinking that he welcomes their ideas AND their participation in a health care summit to do what is right for the American people, the GOP cries foul and threatens to stay home.

This, quite clearly, has little to do with what's right and everything to do with what's politically expedient.

So the question remains: what will Republicans do now? Will they follow the same course they've been on -- negotiate a bill, add in amendments and changes and then walk away -- choosing to block legislation from passing at any cost while making the laughable claim that they weren't involved?

Republicans seem to prefer that Congress achieve nothing in the hopes that they will gain more seats in November. They want to hide behind bipartisanship. But what Republicans are making clear is their undying commitment to winning at all costs. Ignoring the American people's desperate need for jobs, for health care, for banks that work for Main Street and not Wall Street, for a sensible immigration policy. For progress.

It's not always the journey. Sometimes, it is very clearly the destination. Congress cannot abandon their principles, and Congress cannot abandon the needs of the American people. It is their job -- their responsibility -- to govern.

So, for the people who get up and go to work every day -- or increasingly, those who get up and look for work every day -- Congress needs to remember why they were sent here. It wasn't for bipartisanship. It was to take action. It is time Congress restore America's hope for a better future.

 

Follow Anna Burger on Twitter: www.twitter.com/SEIU_AnnaBurger

 
 
  • Comments
  • 65
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Josh Seipp
07:36 PM on 02/22/2010
An excellent analysis. Thank you for sharing it!
Bladernr1001
Vote Libertarian
10:15 PM on 02/20/2010
Bi-Partisanship is really just a code word for creeping socialism now.

Take the health care reform debate for example. Liberals want a system that is basically run by the government. Conservatives do not. How do you compromise on that? You can't be a little bit pregnant.

Bi-Partisanship plays into the liberal hand in that if you don't win outright you can keep on adding things a little bit at a time.

I hope the repubs stand this thing down....I think government run health care will be a disaster. It is already a fiscal disaster with Medcare/Medicade.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NABNYC
10:32 PM on 02/20/2010
The politicians agree we need to "reform" healthcare. That is because it is too expensive. That's the only problem. We have good quality. We have medical and nursing schools that can turn out the number of professionals we need. But it costs too much, and is consuming a large part of people's monthly budgets.

So how can we cut the costs? Use the market principles. Bring in doctors from other countries, pay them $60,000/year for 10 years with citizenship at the end if they want it. Doctors can get away with charging such obscene prices because they have a monopoly, and restrict the number of people who can go to medical school. Do the same for nurses. Pay the nurses more and the doctors less. Build community-owned clinics and staff them with nurse practitioners. Buy or build community-own nonprofit hospitals. Buy drugs from Canada.

The problem is that we have a monopoly control of healthcare in this country. Doctors make millions while citizens die in the streets. Hospitals charge obscene amounts (I was charged $1200 by an ER for seeing a doctor for 15 minutes). They do it because it's a monopoly and they can dictate the terms.

This has nothing to do with socialism. It simply is another example of a small group of rich people stealing everything for themselves while their fellow citizens die from lack of basic services.
Bladernr1001
Vote Libertarian
10:44 AM on 02/21/2010
But teh sol.ution to these problems is not to have the government take over the business.
10:47 AM on 02/21/2010
Your idea of health care kills 45,000 a year. Single Payer insurance costs each American $800 a year, and every single American is fully covered. If you have a plan that privatizes health care, and gives access to health care to every American, speak up. Otherwise, we can only assume you believe in corporate welfare, and do not believe in our right to health care.
Bladernr1001
Vote Libertarian
12:34 PM on 02/21/2010
I strongly disaggree with your stats but this was not the reason for my post.

My point is that regardless of ones opinion on issues like these the reality is that the choices really do not lend themselves to a compromise in many cases.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NABNYC
02:23 PM on 02/20/2010
I think it's a manufactured concept and an excuse. Ever since Obama and the Democrats took control, they have refused to do anything unless the Republicans sign on. I think the idea is that if things don't work out, both parties will get blamed.

But the people put the Democrats in control so they would take charge and get things done. Everything the Democrats have done since taking office is disgraceful, cowardly and corrupt. Before even beginning a public discussion about healthcare, the Democrats met secretly with the Medical CEOs and cut secret deals with them, assuring the CEOs that the Democrats would not do anything to cut into their profits.

The result is that people across this country are being hammered by the medical establishment. Actually left to die. Yet the Democrats do nothing but hand-wringing and meaningless speeches. I've started getting Democratic e-mails warning that the Republicans want to end social security. Yes, I know. But nobody cares. What people want to know is what will the Democrats do? Why are they so unwilling to get tough? If the Democrats don't pass a Medicare for All option for at least people over 50, and those not part of a group policy, then they might as well pack their bags right now.
08:57 AM on 02/21/2010
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/17/business/economy/17gridlock.html

Sensing political advantage, Republicans are resisting President Obama’s call for a bipartisan commission to cut the debt, although recent studies have implicated the tax cuts and spending policies of the years after 2000 when they controlled Congress and the White House.

Even seven Republican senators who had co-sponsored a bill to create a commission nonetheless voted against it recently. “There isn’t a single sitting member of Congress — not one — that doesn’t know exactly where we’re headed,†Mr. Simpson (R) said in a telephone interview “And to use the politics of fear and division and hate on each other — we are at a point right now where it doesn’t make a damn whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican if you’ve forgotten you’re an American.â€

Orrin Hatch (R) quote: ..... "Six years ago under President ["W"] when we [Republicans] had the majority, it was standard practice not to pay for things,"

Now we Democrats are trying to pay for Bushes policy's and idiots are blaming the democrats for the deficit.

There are many D's that cross the aisle. They call the Democrats wimps but what do you call republicans that are afraid to even vote for their own ideas.

It would take a brave Republican to vote for what is good for the people instead of voting no to ensure failure for the democrats.

They are only interested in keeping their own jobs. They are cowards.
11:25 AM on 02/20/2010
I am afraid that partisanship is not our worse problem. Corruption of our system is

We are and have always been a country that has always combined capitalism and socialism.

Every American I have ever met-otherwise no roads, social security, VA etc. - believes the statement below:

"Socialism is required for things that we absolutely must have, like health care, the common defense, police and firefighters, clean air and water, and so forth.

Free markets are wonderful for all the crap we can live without"

Capitalism can and always has existed beside Socialism. They compliment each other.

They both need to be balanced against each other to prevent injustices by either ideology.

That is what our two party system is supposed to be about, but the corruption of our system has thrown it out of balance.

We are now irrelevant in our faux democracy. The will of the senate is the will of the special interests.

Campaign Reform would heal the split of the American people that big money has encouraged in order to weaken us and keep us fighting with each other.

ONE CAUSE--ONE FIGHT--ONE AMERICA

The corruption that is tearing our country apart is hurting ALL of us.

We are ALL Americans

Let us work TOGETHER on what is for AMERICA"S interest.

http://www.fairelectionsnow.org/volunteer/petition (FENA)
http://change-congress.org/ sign the petition

These are bi-partisan efforts, lets fight together
11:00 AM on 02/20/2010
Bipartisanship is a means to an end, IF all sides are invited to the negotiating table and a compromise is hashed out.

But unfortunately for the American people, the Democrats (who are smart enough to recognize and understand the other side's argument) often begin with compromised legislation in hopes of bipartisanship. This leaves little wiggle room for them, makes it easy to appease their corporate sponsors while feigning effort to their constituents, and give the Republicans the edge in doing what they do so well - tricking millions of American voters into supporting legislation that goes against their own self-interest.

Demand real reform, if the Republicans will come along, implement any legitimate proposals, if they continue to be the party of 'no'... F-em!
photo
StevenWells
Objects in the avatar are larger than they appear
11:49 AM on 02/20/2010
Agreed on all counts.

Voters want reps who accede to their wishes and produce results. Most don't much care how they're achieved. Only (we) political junkies follow process, but we all want results that reflect some concern for the public interest. If that means chucking bipartisan compromise, so be it. You can't compromise or negotiate with those who refuse to do so.
10:45 AM on 02/20/2010
Bi-partisanship is a work in progress but in a true democracy the majority is accepted.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jeanrenoir
08:30 AM on 02/20/2010
Only a Birther could be so dumb as to believe that Obama hasn't tried his best--TOO hard, no doubt--to have a bi-partisan dialogue with the Republicans. But now it's obvious to all that they don't want one, and never have. They have always shrewdly seen how they could use Obama's efforts for bi-partisanship simply to make him look like an ineffectual fool, a wimp. Fine. They've had their fun. Now Obama had better ram a good health care bill down their throats, the same way he's ramming progress in Afghanistan-Pakistan down their throats, or Obama's truly toast. Let's hope he somehow channels his inner LBJ at the eleventh hour and saves both us and his presidency.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MPatrick Dahlke
environmental essayist
07:59 AM on 02/20/2010
I can look at bipartisanship in two ways.

The first; is just a splendid invented term designed to give those who use it an excuse not to dig deep enough into the core structural issues facing our economy.

The second; is that the reason the term is used is that there really aren't very many intelligent people in either party.

For the last year we have listened to stimulus talk, healthcare talk, bailout talk but we have not heard any industrial talk. Industrial talk is comprised of clearly defined plans to renovate every house in America, align every community with a vast new, multi-faceted public utility grid, integrate entirely new models of alternative transportation grids into our communities and produce an intelligent and thriving labor force.

Washington DC is not the home of such thinking. In every bit as much as it should be, the knowledge base that does exist and can solve these problems is scattered haphazardly across our nation. If these people in Washington were either interested in or committed to truly connecting the dots of our nation's potentially enormous 21st century industrial growth, nothing else whatsoever would be talked about.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bigOther
03:49 PM on 02/20/2010
These issues are ones that Obama has raised, and even started work on via the stimulus or Recovery Act. Remember the new grid he inaugurated?

No, of course you don't because Republicans have thrown sand in everyone's eyes with their repeat a big lie over and over and the people will be duped.
photo
Tsakonas
Architect
07:56 AM on 02/20/2010
It's clear what games the GOP is up to, but are Americans smart enough or being informed of what's going on? The GOP base is always the noisiest, no shame having group of people and they appear more numerous than they are. The Carter disaster made the Dems into the meek, passive aggressive wimps they are today. You would think the GOP would have it's tail between their legs after an even worse disaster, Bush. Instead we've become far more polarized-paralyzed and people know they're repeating lies, but don't care. It's become a playground name calling game. The whole country has lost it's ability to be bipartisan. Politics has become a college football game.
07:40 AM on 02/20/2010
there was bipartinsanship during the bush years. when the patriot act came up for a vote, the dems. all jumped on the bandwagon. remember, this was the bill no one read first. when it came time to vote for the iraqi invasion, the dems. jumped on that too. funding the wars? right there.
and when the bush "era" thankfully drew to a close they all screamed about the bush policies they voted for. why'd they vote that way? didn't want to appear soft on terror, soft on defense. instead of voting their consciences, they voted for there self interests. that's when we should have had a party of no. maybe this country wouldn't be in the trouble it's in now.
07:32 AM on 02/20/2010
As long as there are only two parties to choose from nothing in washington will ever change. People get all worked up hating one party only to find they have to turn to the only alternative which they hated before that. It is a sad situation.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
jrutle
01:43 AM on 02/20/2010
Bipartisanship is neither an means or and end, but a copout. Americans don't care about Congressional process, they care that the majority party they voted into power delivers on what they promised.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rogan
06:42 AM on 02/20/2010
I don't know about that. I don't care about parties. I do care about good ideas, and I care about getting things done. Most of the ideas I like are "progressive," but not all; I could easily support a Republican who was a smart and principled conservative, and not the type we're dealing with, almost entirely, this year... So I very much think of bipartisanship as a means to an end.

I've thought all along that Obama's strategy in "reaching out" over and over in the name of bipartisanship, and getting nothing, is to illuminate what the Republicans are doing, which is trying to stop the government from working at all. I think his plan was to do that, year one, then come out swinging, beginning of year two.

It was important, to give this current Republican pack of elected swindlers, a chance to take up the gauntlet of good governance. It was important to allow them the chance to do their jobs. It was important to allow the American people every chance to see how Republicans react to such offers and overtures. Despite the number of desperate, frothing, almost-mindless "trolls" that crawl over HP pages, trying to drown out actual substantive dialogues with their static, I have the impression that the "American people," by and large, understand what's going wrong, and whose fault it is (though they, that is we, are rapidly losing patience, with the pattycake "leaders" like Reid seem to prefer to play).
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
jrutle
09:22 AM on 02/20/2010
Agree, good post. My underlying point is that Americans care that the WH and Congress are effective at getting things done and will not reward a majority party that is ineffective and uses GOP obstructionism as an excuse.
12:13 PM on 02/20/2010
I hope you are right.

"I have the impression that the "American people," by and large, understand what's going wrong, and whose fault it is"

I felt the same way in 2004, but bush was re-elected anyway.

Remember Harry and Louise?
Remember WMD?
Remember the Tonkin Gulf?
Remember the Maine?

I could go on and on as you well know.

It is the fault of lying politicians, our media, and most of all our ignorant, stupid citizens whose line of thought is no longer than a bumper sticker.

The public is stupid. I saw it during Viet Nam. Thought the next generation would be smarter with the knowledge of how the public was duped then. I was wrong, here comes the neo-cons. People are even more stupid.
08:33 AM on 02/23/2010
Bipartisanship is not a copout. It's the one word in the English language that terrifies conservatives because it serves to further undercut the influence of the extreme fringe of the minority party. In order for conservatives to be able to move the political needle at all, it is vital that these United States never become united.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:10 AM on 02/20/2010
When bipartisanship fails because Republicans won't support any joint action with Obama, the President's FIRST obligation must be to the American public, who are suffering in this recession. End the Republicans' charade now. Let Republicans show their contempt for unemployed workers by filibustering a jobs bill. Demonstrate the evidence that Republicans have no workable ideas for health care and other problems.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
jrutle
01:45 AM on 02/20/2010
Agree, good post.
12:47 AM on 02/20/2010
When is the last time bipartisanship produced a major piece of reform legislation? When has bipartisanship ever produced change? When you get down to it, major change (and that is what we need) is never the product of bipartisanship. Civil Rights legislation, just for one example, was not the product of bipartisanship.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:41 AM on 02/20/2010
Anna, you are absolutely right, and your title says it all. Americans want jobs, they want financial security, and they want to keep their homes. If bipartisanship gets them those things, great. If 51 Democratic votes gets them those things, it's the outcomes they care about, not the process. The problem with this whole focus on bipartisanship is that, like the health care debate of the last year, it's all about process. That's not what people care about. That's inside baseball to most Americans. They care about feeding their families, hanging onto their homes and jobs, and being able to get health care. When Americans say they want bipartisanship, they are saying they want government to solve problems, not to get caught in gridlock. They'd be happy for some civility in Washington, too, but frankly, that's low down the list of concerns of the average American, who doesn't doesn't care all that much about how the relationship between John Boehner and Harry Reid. If they did, there are plenty of couples therapists in Washington who'd be happy to meet with them and help them work out their differences in private.