Why Fight Fair?
Paul Waldman | May 16, 2011| TAPPED
A year ago, I wrote a column arguing that Republicans had figured out that many of the norms governing behavior in Washington -- for instance, that the filibuster is an extraordinary measure that shouldn't be used on literally every piece of legislation more significant than the renaming of a post office -- were completely optional and could be violated without cost. The Republicans, I said, had become the party of "Yes we can" (do pretty much whatever we want), while the Democrats remained the party of "Maybe we shouldn't." What the Republicans understood is that to most Americans, arguments over things like congressional procedure look like "Washington" squabbling with itself, which only helps them as the party of the opposition.
In the current debate over raising the debt ceiling, the same thing is going on. Republicans have taken an extraordinary position, threatening to subvert the American economy and perhaps even trigger a global financial crisis by having America default on its debts, unless they get the spending cuts they want. The problem is, most Americans have no idea just how unprecedented and appalling this position is. The main reason for that is the reaction of Democrats. Some Democrats have certainly condemned it strongly, but the overall message has been, "C'mon guys, let's talk about this." The president told Democrats not to "draw a line in the sand" on the issue. So the result is, once again, a negotiation about whether Republicans will get everything they want or just part of what they want.
And what will the public see when the deal is finally reached? Precisely because Democrats treated Republican actions not as though they were abominable but as though they were just incorrect, for the overwhelming majority of Americans who have only the vaguest sense of what these issues are about, it just looks as though there was some kind of argument in Washington, but now it's over. There was some squabbling about budgets or something, then there was some kind of deal. So in the end, Republicans will have extracted significant policy concessions but paid no political price for their willingness to threaten to destroy the economy. They win again. And next time, when someone on their side comes up with a new outlandish scheme, if someone else says, "Maybe we shouldn't go that far," the rest of them will quite reasonably reply, "Why the hell not?"
Paul Waldman | May 16, 2011| TAPPED
A year ago, I wrote a column arguing that Republicans had figured out that many of the norms governing behavior in Washington -- for instance, that the filibuster is an extraordinary measure that shouldn't be used on literally every piece of legislation more significant than the renaming of a post office -- were completely optional and could be violated without cost. The Republicans, I said, had become the party of "Yes we can" (do pretty much whatever we want), while the Democrats remained the party of "Maybe we shouldn't." What the Republicans understood is that to most Americans, arguments over things like congressional procedure look like "Washington" squabbling with itself, which only helps them as the party of the opposition.
In the current debate over raising the debt ceiling, the same thing is going on. Republicans have taken an extraordinary position, threatening to subvert the American economy and perhaps even trigger a global financial crisis by having America default on its debts, unless they get the spending cuts they want. The problem is, most Americans have no idea just how unprecedented and appalling this position is. The main reason for that is the reaction of Democrats. Some Democrats have certainly condemned it strongly, but the overall message has been, "C'mon guys, let's talk about this." The president told Democrats not to "draw a line in the sand" on the issue. So the result is, once again, a negotiation about whether Republicans will get everything they want or just part of what they want.
And what will the public see when the deal is finally reached? Precisely because Democrats treated Republican actions not as though they were abominable but as though they were just incorrect, for the overwhelming majority of Americans who have only the vaguest sense of what these issues are about, it just looks as though there was some kind of argument in Washington, but now it's over. There was some squabbling about budgets or something, then there was some kind of deal. So in the end, Republicans will have extracted significant policy concessions but paid no political price for their willingness to threaten to destroy the economy. They win again. And next time, when someone on their side comes up with a new outlandish scheme, if someone else says, "Maybe we shouldn't go that far," the rest of them will quite reasonably reply, "Why the hell not?"
No comments:
Post a Comment