NOTE TO READERS: We're in the process of moving this week so the usual posting on Sunday as well as replies to comments will be missing this week. Thank you.
0-0-0-0-0
Last November 19, about two weeks after the mid-term elections, the posting was entitled "Disappearance of the Middle: Bipolarization of Politics." The bottom line of the posting was that "the political middle seems to have disappeared, at least for now, as we drift toward increased bipolar politics." The "at least for now" still holds.
A very recent New York Times article carried the head, "Fight Harder, Voters Telling Congressmen." The article was based on comments from a few local gatherings held by House lawmakers during their unearned summer vacation. The comments came from the left and right, or perhaps it would be better to say from the farther left and right. They came from party activists who are the people who tend to show up for such gatherings. The middle and independents stay at home. Their primary political act is casting a vote, with an occasional word of disgruntlement.
The key words and views expressed in the article were "fight harder," meaning the lawmakers were not tough enough. A Minnesota liberal said President Obama just "rolled over" and needs "some steel in his backbone". A Utah Republican was quoted: ". . . Republicans chasing Democrats to the left, and I hate it when the party deserts me." And a Georgia Congressman was applauded when he said "compromises are what got us into this mess." Another liberal Democrat put blame on the tea party which "forced the country from one manufactured crisis after another."
The scarey part of the story, if such anecdotal stuff reflects a broader public opinion, is that what lawmakers seem to be hearing are messages that reinforce their partisan/ideological predispositions. Is anyone out there saying, go back to Washington and work issues out in an agreeable manner without political posturing and a vision that doesn't go beyond just getting re-elected?
Recent polls show an all time low for congressional approval ratings, with disapproval over 80 percent. Is the disapproval more a reflection of the disappointment of the ideologically driven wings of the two parties or does the low opinion primarily reflect a general attitude toward congressional political and policy behavior? That's no small question. This blogger prefers to think it's the latter, general disapproval, but the Times story could lend credence to the view that the two extreme sides don't believe their lawmakers are tough enough and thus give very low grades to Congress. If the latter is the case, then we are in for some discouraging times ahead when the so-called Super Congress makes it recommendations by late November on further cuts big cuts in spending and, perhaps, revenue increases. There is already room for skepticism about the Super Procedures of the Super Congress, a skepticism that could get even deeper if intransigence, purveyed primarily and quite successfully by the tea party to fellow Republicans, continues as the guideline for resolution of highly partisan political conflicts in Washington.
To me the Times story is depressing since lawmakers hear what they want to hear and if what they hear is that they're not tough enough in pushing their partisan/ideological agendas, then there can be little expectation of light at the end of the long, dark tunnel we have been traveling through. Is there a voice for the middle that is clear enough and loud enough to say, and be heard, that is is indeed time for a change in the Washington political culture? --or "In the name of God, go", or in Brooklyn baseball parlance,"throw the bums out."
I'd say "throw the bums out" but there do seem to be some congress people who want to do what they feel is right for the country - get the economy moving and get people back to work. There are some who have called upon the Congressional leadership to call an end to the current vacation and get all of Congress back to work. It is the life long politicians who need to be thrown out. We need people in Congress who aren't there for their own self re-election interests. As I have stated in previous comments I am a big fan of Congressional term limits. That is what of the only amendments to the Constitution that I could support.
ReplyDeleteCarol
ReplyDeleteThe idea of getting Congress to come back early is a bit scarey. They don't deserve the vacation they're on but the country may be safer if they stay out of town. I never used to be fond of term limits but I'm rapidly warming to the idea. Something could be worked out to stagger the term so we wouldn't be getting all new people at the same time.
I agree with Charley that we are better off with Congress on vacation. There do seem to be some Congress people that are sincere about their desire to help the country and not worry about their own re-election but unfortunately I think a lot of them are over powered by the long time incumbents that have made a career out of it and just suck off the public teat.
ReplyDeleteI think the whole concept of a super Congress is ridiculous. We have a whole Congress that is there to do the job. Speaking of jobs, I am disappointed in Obama's actions on the issue of jobs in this country. If nothing else it was bad form to announce that he would deal with it after his elite vacation. It would have been better if he had just kept the time line quiet. I'm expecting it to be a rehash of the same things that have been addressed in the past.
dpchuck
ReplyDeleteWhile maybe it is time to throw the rascals out, there are some old timers I have some confidence in. It is most of the new guys who seems to be causing the political intransigence. The old timers are more prone to the old practice of cutting a deal.
I agree. The so-called Super Congress or Super Committe is a clear sign of how Congress is the broken branch of government. As to the jobs problem, I'm having a difficult time trying to imagine what a meaninfgul program would look like. I'm an old fashioned, unreconstructable stimulus type but that doesn't seem to be in the cards.