fbpx
Politics Foreign Affairs Culture Fellows Program

Does our political system work?

The NYT reports that the failure of the supercommittee process has increased already debilitating cynicism about Washington. Excerpts: The idea of the committee was, in part, to save Congress from itself: let a dozen members forge a compromise to cut the deficit, and then put it to the whole Congress for an up-or-down vote. It […]

The NYT reports that the failure of the supercommittee process has increased already debilitating cynicism about Washington. Excerpts:

The idea of the committee was, in part, to save Congress from itself: let a dozen members forge a compromise to cut the deficit, and then put it to the whole Congress for an up-or-down vote. It was Congress lashing itself to the mast, like Odysseus, to resist the siren calls of lobbyists and special interest groups. But in the end, the ship went nowhere.

People were not just annoyed: they were worried. Neil Elkins, 52, who works on boats on the Seattle waterfront, said that the failure was “endangering my confidence in our system of checks and balances.” Khalfani Lawson, a 23-year-old student at Kennesaw State University in Georgia, said that the lack of progress was breeding apathy among the young. “If it was a constructive process, people would be more inclined to be involved.” And Ernest Wong, a 44-year-old from Los Angeles who works in marketing, put it bluntly: “This makes me scared.”

I don’t know if it makes me scared, but it does make me worried. I do blame members of Congress, obviously, but I think Frum might be onto something when he says that on the right, at least, this is as much a failure of followership as it is a failure of leadership. I imagine it’s also true on the left, but I don’t know that world as well as I do my own. We rage at Congress for not getting its act together and working out something for the greater good, but if Our Team compromised, we would hold them responsible for being weaklings who capitulated in the Great Battle of Good Vs. Evil. And they would pay at the ballot box. When we say we want them to Do Something, what we mean, or what the loudest and most committed of us mean, is that we want the other side to give up and give our side its way. But that’s not how politics works, at least not in a country as divided as our own is, and divided over issues in substantive ways.

If you yourself can’t think of something you would give up to get a workable compromise, isn’t that part of the problem? Me, I would accept higher taxes and fewer benefits (e.g., means-testing Social Security, and raising the retirement age), for the sake of stabilizing the system. How about you?

I would have more confidence in our leaders if they would actually lead — that is, tell the people what needs to happen, even if the people don’t want to hear it — and be prepared to accept the consequences. What else is there?

UPDATE: Ezra Klein today:

Frankly, it’s hard to find even one area in which supercommittee Republicans offered a substantially new compromise — or even matched what Boehner offered Obama. Which perhaps makes sense. A Pew poll (pdf) earlier this month asked whether, “on the federal deficit, lawmakers who share your views should stand by principles, even if no progress is made,” or “be willing to compromise, even if it means a deal you disagree with.” Among Democrats, 74 percent chose compromise. Among independents, 67 percent chose compromise. Among Republicans, only 52 percent chose compromise. And the 38 percent who chose principles amassed a pretty good record in 2010 of primarying politicians who betrayed them.

Advertisement

Comments

Want to join the conversation?

Subscribe for as little as $5/mo to start commenting on Rod’s blog.

Join Now