TW: The tendency is always claim things were easier way back when. But what if a sea change in American politics has occurred? What if our governance processes rather than being tried and true through over 200 years of history are becoming time bound and sclerotic? What if obstructionism is a rational political approach but an irrational governance method.?
From Democratic House #2 leader Steny Hoyer (Maryland) via Ezra Klein:
"...it's not clear that minority obstructionism is bad politics. Back in the early 1990s, of course, Bill Kristol, among others, urged Republicans to kill the Clinton health-care bill. Not modify it, or improve it, or amend it, but kill it. And then they picked up more than 50 seats.
Newt Gingrich was of course the chief proponent of that policy, and he and Bob Michel, who was leader of the Republicans, disagreed. And Gingrich eventually succeeded in pushing Michel out. Michel’s view was you sit down, offer your input, and move forward. The theory was that the American people elected the legislative body to make policy and so you make policy. Gingrich’s proposition, and maybe accurately, was that as long as you, Bob Michel, and our party cooperate with Democrats and get 20 or 30 percent of what we want and they get to say they solved the problem and had a bipartisan bill, there's no incentive for the American people to change leadership. You have to confront, delay, and undermine and impose failure in order to move the public. To some degree, he was proven right in 1994."
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/12/hoyer_draft.html
No comments:
Post a Comment