Try this one -- this is really thinking "out of the box":
The U.S. Senate is an absolute mess -- it is at a complete stalemate. Nothing, absolutely nothing, is getting done. Business people can't make business decisions about the future (hire? don't hire? buy more equipment?) because they don't know what the tax situation will be come January 1. They need prediction to make good business decisions but they can't until the Senate decides the tax bill. Prediction is more important that what is actually decided.
The Democrats have the majority and they decide if something gets debated or not. They decide if and when the tax bill gets debated and voted on. Right now the two parties in the Senate won't talk to each other and nothing -- absolutely nothing -- is getting done.
Senator Harry Reid is not performing as a leader of the Senate but as an advocate for his party, and he has blocked important issues from being debated and voted on -- most notably a budget for the country. The American people are suffering because Senator Reid is choosing advocacy over leadership.
Solutions and plans will only come if and when the two parties in the Senate begin to talk to each other. So, how can they get their talks jump started? They should do what we we do in the judicial system to jump-start discussion. They need to get a facilitator/mediator just to come in and get the two sides to begin to talk. This is not to convince either party of any particular position or convince them to vote any particular way, but merely to get them to talk to each other about the important issues. Perhaps, with good discussion, a solution (or compromise of some sort) will follow, as that is what happens in the court system. You get the two sides in the room and work them over.
So who would be the perfect facilitator? Who could get the two parties to speak to each other? Obviously it has to be someone with stature and since the Democrats have the majority and start the process, it makes sense to get a Democrat who can convince his party to begin to talk.
I think the Republicans should suggest former President Bill Clinton. The Democrats could not complain (they would look bad if they did) and I bet Clinton would love the challenge. The Republicans would have to love this idea since it puts the pressure on the Democrats to come to the table if it is President Clinton telling them to do so.
What do you think?
PS: Instead of taking a recess the entire month of August, the entire Senate should stay in Washington, talk to each other and maybe even resolve the issues they have ignored. We can't wait. It is abusive for the Senate to fail to try.
Rebecca Juro: It's Time for the U.S. Senate to Walk the Walk on ENDA (AUDIO)
Stewart J. Lawrence: Pressure Is Growing on Both Parties to Compromise on Immigration
Eddy Evans: Who'd Want to Be U.S. Vice President?
Yes, the two legislative bodies, in debt to their various donor/lobbyists, and, polarized perhaps to the point of danger..... are just about dead in the water. But I assign at least 51% of the blame to Republican legislators, who by their own admission, have stated their #1 job is to get Obama out of office.
I guess you forgot Mitch McConnell's famous last words.......I didn't.
We are all very tired of mitch declare this president a goner in 2012. We are tired of all the rhetoric, standing in the way of every bill to help people, refusing to solve a debt crisis, demanding personal cuts to Americans in exchange for policy bills, and the list goes on and on. You hand held sarah palin for a long, long time, validating every foolish statement she made. Your husband, a scoudrel at best, represented her. Seriously, you lack any credibility, but nice try though.
The chickens are coming home to roost for the GOP. In their attempt to acheive a "Permanent Republican Majority", the party sold it's soul to social conservatives and Wall Street.
It worked swell at first. When the economy was booming, it wasn't hard to get moderate Dems to go along with supply-side policies, It wasn't hard to talk social conservative during campaigns and forget it after the election. Voters weren't really paying attention because, well, times were good.
That's not the way things are now. Social conservatives are fed up with the lip-service and are demanding results, or else. Big donors are now able to "secretly" donate as much as they want, and they're demanding results, or else. Any GOP congressman who does anything displeasing to either of these groups is committing political suicide.
Want to fix it? Get rid of the rules that allow one Senator to raise the bar for passage of a bill from 51 to 60 votes by suggesting anonymously that he might filibuster. If this is about principles, as they claim, they should be willing to stand up and be counted, Mr. Smith Goes To Washington style.
Want to fix it even more? Pass the DISCLOSE act. We deserve to know who's trying to buy our elected officials.
We need to keep it simple, and everyone is pretty bipartisan about Elmo.
She has a long history of being a partisan hack.
What we need is for everyone, Republicans, Democrats, media, Fox news, Senators, Representatives and the general public to pay attention, remember what happened yesterday and engage in discussion of issues that doesn't simply boil down to trying to score points. Scoring points in a rhetorical discussion is unhelpful if you are looking for solutions; but it is helpful in winning elections.
These people are suppose to have an education, yet they don't even know what their job description entails.