As this new year begins it brings with it the eternal optimism of change. A new Congress is about to be sworn in, the Executive and Legislature will now be controlled by different parties representing opposing agendas. What will this mean? Will we see the same ugliness and arrogance we saw with the last Congress or will we see people willing to give and take?
An interesting idea is that give and take. As I write it down it sounds like a wonderful way to govern, but as I think about it; I am not so sure. If the past Congresses have shown us anything; the going-in principle for every politician is what is in it for me, and my district? Therefore, compromise is generally achieved by buying off the politician with some sweetheart deal or pork for his or her district. Can we afford to continue the same old business as usual approach as our national debt approaches the current ceiling of $14, 300,000,000,000.00? Today it sits at 13,871,130,353,817.40 so some time in the next three months we are either going to have to shut down the government, or increase the debt ceiling.
What kind of give and take will go into the debate on that subject? I think a couple of tactics should be self-evident with the Democrats. First they will play the fear card and that will be followed by the race card. We can expect frequent and virulent claims that Republicans and the Tea Party are out to end medicare and social security and will do it by closing down the government.
Lets think about the fear first. When Mr. Gingrich was speaker of the House they Republicans did allow the government to shut down and it cost them the next election. I don’t think they will make the same mistake again but if they did what would happen? Would they shut down the whole government? No, I don’t think that is possible. For example, can they stop the military? I suppose they could, but would that happen? Would we strand all the overseas troops, stop our stateside defense, empty out the missile silos, direct all the ships at sea to return to port, and stop monitoring all the satellites? So with some restrictions the Department of Defense would say open. Would they close the Department of Homeland Security? Again, not very likely. Departments of State and Treasury? No. Departments of Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Labor, Transportation, Veterans Affairs and Attorney General? Maybe some or all are potential candidates for unpaid vacations (except for subsets deemed as vital to keeping the government running). Interestingly Social Security and other entitlement programs are “non-discretionary” meaning the executive branch does not have control over disbursements. Therefore, they would probably not be stopped, although the mechanisms to process them could be. This would give the liberals a field day, so again I don’t think that is a card that will be played as much as the newly elected might think it should.
The question over what do we do about our non-discretionary spending in the long term is really a critical one I am afraid this congress, like past ones, won’t address with any real approach. As more people retire that percentage of the federal budget can only go in one direction, unless our legislatures are willing to make the hard choices. With the lobbying efforts of AARP and others, will they have the backbone to stand up and make those choices? I for one think not.
Now about race? Since both parties seem to be keeping the same old tired leadership in place, and the networks have the same old taking heads ranting on... I would expect to see the same old “us and them” attacks based only on the thinnest of pretext. Too bad we can’t seem to move beyond the realization that we are all different, with different goals and agendas but we are all human with the same ultimate needs. What is the legitimate role of the government in allowing for our individuality versus the collective good? If we continue to make the debate about race I don’t think we will never move towards the greater discussion of the individual rights versus the common good and who gets to set them. Isn’t that the continuing issue before the Supreme Court on almost every case?
2 comments:
Clearly we are in a pickle. I think what needs to happen from the Tea Party/Republican side is a realization that leveling with people will ultimately work, though it might cause some losses in the short term (not to mention plenty of caterwauling.) But the debt problem isn't going away and being willing to talk about it like responsible adults will help immensely.
I think we need to raise to 70-75 the age at which one receives Social Security. I think the new health care law needs to be repealed before it explodes like a red ink grenade. What about halving corporate tax rates to get the economy moving again? We need to be rid of some of the well-intentioned, but burdensome environmental regulations. And so on and so on. It's a huge, generational kind of task. And it is a thankless one. But our country needs it.
I agree. Everyone wants to fix the problem, but don't mess with me. I can't imagine the gnashing of teeth, beating for breasts and the tearing asunder of garments that will occur at AARP when a 70-75 start date for SS is discussed.
Post a Comment