Is this the bi partisanship you were speaking of, Neil? Inquiring minds want to know.
The GOP's lame-duck blockade
So how's this for leadership in Washington? Senate Republicans plan to block debate on virtually all Democratic-backed legislation that isn't related to tax cuts or government spending in the lame-duck session of Congress. Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Republican minority leader, and Sen. Jon Kyl, the Republican whip, added the signatures of all members of the Republican Senate caucus to a letter that promises to implement the plan.
Never mind that Senate Republicans have obstinately fought most Democratic legislation for the past two years already. Now they want to make it official. Whether it's a political gimmick or a real effort to force a focus on urgent deadlines, the letter sets aside a reality of productive leadership we expect from the people we elect.
Democrats certainly aren't blameless for taking part in their own brand of partisanship over the past two years. Obama's so-called "Slurpee Summit" at the White House Tuesday was a first step in trying to bring the two sides together, but may be too belated to do much good. And the Republicans surely believe they have good reason to petition Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid: they want to keep Congress's priorities on funding the government and the impending expiration of the Bush tax cuts. "With little time left in this Congressional session," their letter reads, "legislative scheduling should be focused on these critical priorities."
Indeed, priorities on both sides should--and will--remain on these issues, particularly with the looming tax-cut expiration deadline. It would be political suicide for any representative, senator or president to be accused of raising taxes on the middle class by preventing a vote from happening this year. Democrats may be pushing their own position--however fractured and vulnerable to compromise it may be--but that doesn't mean they will dilly dally on bringing it to vote because they were messing around on some other pet project.
Deadlines are deadlines. Priorities are priorities. All leaders--corporate, governmental or otherwise--know they have to meet the prior and focus on the latter. But they also know they can't completely ignore the rest of their jobs, even if those priorities are lower down the list, just because they've got a big project to finish, a critical deadline to meet, or a particularly thorny challenge to solve. We expect our leaders to be able to focus on more than one thing at a time, to set priorities but not ignore the small stuff.
Of course, this is the Senate we're talking about here, where politics has become so corroding and divisive that the chamber has nearly lost its capacity to govern. Perhaps the mere expectation from our leaders of multitasking is too much to ask. Yes, Congress needs to set priorities and focus on coming to a compromise on the tax cuts. But to formalize that into a pledge that opposes any legislation the other party proposes is neglecting the rest of their duties and adding even more political kindling to an already explosive situation. |
