The Obama administration has pursued bipartisanship for so long without success that I'm ready to find the concept debunked on Snopes.com. Could it be any more obvious that the GOP leadership's current strategy is to deny the president a legislative victory -- of any kind, even if it means doing a 180 on what they've claimed to support in the past? They don't even try to keep it a secret; Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) recently admitted as much to a CNBC interviewer. When Democrats say "bipartisanship," the minority party hears "more years in the wilderness."
And the plan is working for them. If voters reject the Dems in November, it won't be because they legislated too far to the left or right: It will be because they were outflanked by their opposition, and didn't get to legislate at all. Americans hate weak leaders even more than ones who are wrong-headed, but steadfast: Witness the reelection of George W. Bush. Voters want the candidates they support to appear sure about what they're doing, because if they wanted to find someone who didn't know how to fix the country's problems, they could look in a mirror.
This isn't such a bad thing. The only ones surprised that people expect results from DC are legislators who ran to win job security. So while the GOP's ideas, or lack of them, aren't worth over-examining, their methods are. Whether they're setting the agenda or opposing it, here's what they do that the majority party needs to do, too:
- They get out in front of an issue and frame the debate. The Dems need their own Frank Luntz, someone who's equally good at concocting pithy phrases in a language lab. Faster than you can say "obstructionism," Republicans respond to thoughtful legislation like healthcare with wrongheaded but emotion-churning phrases like "death panels." This puts the Democrats, with their carefully-reasoned arguments, on the defensive. Then the President has to go out and deliver an impassioned, soaring speech to clarify his intentions. He inevitably impresses, but by then the waters have already been muddied. Berkeley professor of linguistics George Lakoff has made a career of this type of term-crafting, and should be Googled for inspiration. Whatever terms party leaders agree on, they should be repeated often, with the same iron discipline Republicans show -- minus the distortions and fabrications.
- They won't be shamed into cooperating. From what I can tell, a goal of the upcoming jobs legislation is, besides putting unemployed Americans back to work, to embarrass the inevitably naysaying Republicans into explaining why they hate jobs. But if history is a predictor, they're most likely going to frame their refusal in some kind of "It'll increase the deficit" or "I'm not going to advance a socialist agenda" nonsense. Then the Democrats will lapse into the default mode of going on the defensive, arguing amongst themselves and dropping the ball. The current GOP understands one thing, and that's, in the immortal words of Mr. Karl Rove, "Never apologize, never explain." That's why the Dems need to avail themselves of every procedural move at their disposal, because:
- Republicans wouldn't hesitate to do anything and everything they can to pass legislation they favor. To be fair, they believe that what they're doing is what the constituents who elected them want them to do. And for the same reason, Dems need to be just as ruthless. First, they should eliminate or seriously revise the procedural filibuster, which basically rewrites the Constitution to require 60 Senate votes for a bill's passage. Tom Harkin of Iowa says he intends to introduce legislation to reform this bill-killer, but he needs the support of his peers, not to mention voters' pressure on them. The Democrats should also use reconciliation, the procedure that requires 51 votes for passage of a bill, whenever possible. As David Plouffe recently editorialized in the Washington Post, nothing will bring American voters onboard the majority bandwagon like passing good legislation, even if it takes creative thinking to do it. For example, Minnesota's Al Franken has proposed some creative solutions to the Healthcare debate that involve reconciliation first, and continued fixes second.
The usual suspects would whine and stamp their feet, but they've proven that they intend to do that no matter what the Democrats do. So what do they have to lose?
Loading comments…
However, what I hear too frequently, is the reason for failure is the message was clouded or it was not articulated well. This is also false. Something may sound good on the surface, but when run through the wringer from the Tyranny on the Patomac, the details of enforcement are what killed public support. Cap and trade is a travesty, an affront to private property rights and institutionalizes a paper-only artificial industry. Health Care, in any of the versions you wish to refer, would do nothing to affect cost, would grow the consumer in the industry, and/or would enslave the medical community.
The politics of do-gooderism is a failed tactic. It may look great on paper, but when the details of enforcement are exposed to the light of day, people harken to the possibilities of rights and freedom. Those will be difficult to wrench from their hands.
Come November, the best case scenario I envision is gridlock. I hope neither party has a majority. That way, we can minimize the damage coming from the Tyranny on the Patomac.
Personallly I don't need a win to vote for a president - if I see someone who fights the good fight , but that is not what I have seen with Obama and his Chicago entourage.. They call us f...king retards after we fought to put them in office to bring about change. Apparently the only change they sought was the title next to their name.
They have colluded with the powerful to prevent change.
Since the 2008 elections, we've seen that corruption destroy any hope we had for the Democrats. They talk tough about credit card reform but refuse to do the only thing that would help the citizens, which is to pass a usury law and limit the amount of interest credit card companies will charge. On healthcare, the citizens want the option of joining a non-profit system, but the Democrats tell us, without debate or discussion, that they won't even consider that.
I don't think that the Democrats are stupid or weak. They're just too corrupt to do anything good.
Friends, show your support for ending the filibuster here:
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/pages/Changing-the-US-Senate-rules-bring-back-democracy/278379601906?ref=ts