Options
Ungovernable? Nonsense.
· Friday, February 19, 2010
WASHINGTON -- In the latter days of the Carter presidency, it became fashionable to say that the office had become unmanageable and was simply too big for one man. Some suggested a single, six-year presidential term. The president's own White House counsel suggested abolishing the separation of powers and going to a more parliamentary system of unitary executive control. America had become ungovernable.
Then came Ronald Reagan, and all that chatter disappeared.
The tyranny of entitlements? Reagan collaborated with Tip O'Neill, the legendary Democratic House speaker, to establish the Alan Greenspan commission that kept Social Security solvent for a quarter-century.
A corrupted system of taxation? Reagan worked with liberal Democrat Bill Bradley to craft a legislative miracle: tax reform that eliminated dozens of loopholes and slashed rates across the board -- and fueled two decades of economic growth.
Later, a highly skilled Democratic president, Bill Clinton, successfully tackled another supposedly intractable problem: the culture of intergenerational dependency. He collaborated with another House speaker, Newt Gingrich, to produce the single most successful social reform of our time, the abolition of welfare as an entitlement.
It turned out that the country's problems were not problems of structure but of leadership. Reagan and Clinton had it. Carter didn't. Under a president with extensive executive experience, good political skills and an ideological compass in tune with the public, the country was indeed governable.
It's 2010 and the first-year agenda of a popular and promising young president has gone down in flames. Barack Obama's two signature initiatives -- cap-and-trade and health care reform -- lie in ruins.
Desperate to explain away this scandalous state of affairs, liberal apologists haul out the old reliable from the Carter years: "America the Ungovernable." So declared Newsweek. "Is America Ungovernable?" coyly asked The New Republic. Guess the answer.
The rage at the machine has produced the usual litany of systemic explanations. Special interests are too powerful. The Senate filibuster stymies social progress. A burdensome constitutional order prevents innovation. If only we could be more like China, pines Tom Friedman, waxing poetic about the efficiency of the Chinese authoritarian model, while America flails about under its "two parties ... with their duel-to-the-death paralysis." The better thinkers, bewildered and furious that their president has not gotten his way, have developed a sudden disdain for our inherently incremental constitutional system.
Yet, what's new about any of these supposedly ruinous structural impediments? Special interests blocking policy changes? They have been around since the beginning of the republic -- and since the beginning of the republic, strong presidents, like the two Roosevelts, have rallied the citizenry and overcome them.
And then, of course, there's the filibuster, the newest liberal bete noire. "Don't blame Mr. Obama," writes Paul Krugman of the president's failures. "Blame our political culture instead. ... And blame the filibuster, under which 41 senators can make the country ungovernable."
Ungovernable, once again. Of course, just yesterday the same Paul Krugman was warning about "extremists" trying "to eliminate the filibuster" when Democrats used it systematically to block one Bush (43) judicial nomination after another. Back then, Democrats touted it as an indispensable check on overweening majority power. Well, it still is. Indeed, the Senate with its ponderous procedures and decentralized structure is serving precisely the function the Founders intended: as a brake on the passions of the House and a caution about precipitous transformative change.
Leave it to Mickey Kaus, a principled liberal who supports health care reform, to debunk these structural excuses: "Lots of intellectual effort now seems to be going into explaining Obama's (possible/likely/impending) health care failure as the inevitable product of larger historic and constitutional forces. ... But in this case there's a simpler explanation: Barack Obama's job was to sell a health care reform plan to American voters. He failed."
He failed because the utter implausibility of its central promise -- expanded coverage at lower cost -- led voters to conclude that it would lead ultimately to more government, more taxes and more debt. More broadly, the Democrats failed because, thinking the economic emergency would give them the political mandate and legislative window, they tried to impose a left-wing agenda on a center-right country. The people said no, expressing themselves first in spontaneous demonstrations, then in public opinion polls, then in elections -- Virginia, New Jersey and, most emphatically, Massachusetts.
That's not a structural defect. That's a textbook demonstration of popular will expressing itself -- despite the special interests -- through the existing structures. In other words, the system worked.
(c) 2010, The Washington Post Writers Group
Third-party content does not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Patriot Post.
Options
Subscribe
Representative Duncan Hunter: "America was founded on core principles and traditions. The Patriot Post keeps those principles alive in the public debate, inspiring this and the next generation of conservative leaders." It's Right. It's Free. Subscribe now!
The Right Opinion
- Peggy Noonan: Mitt Romney's Moment
- Argus Hamilton: From The Comedy Store
- Burt Prelutsky: Time to Start Playing Offense
- Rich Galen: Obama & Romney Tout Good News
- Edwin J. Feulner: 'Law of the Sea' Treaty: Sink It
- Arnold Ahlert: With Democrats, You're Either All In - or All Out
- Oliver North: Memorial Day 2012
- Ken Blackwell: Remarks on Religious Liberty
- L. Brent Bozell: Canada's 'Scientific' Museum of Smut
- Michelle Malkin: Obama's Land of the LOST
- Rebecca Hagelin: The 'Gay Marriage' Spin
- David Limbaugh: Obama and Leahy vs. Sir William Blackstone
Grassroots Commentary
Policy and Analysis
- Heritage Foundation Insider
- Heritage Foundation Research
- American Enterprise Institute
- Center for Strategic and International Studies
- The Cato Institute
- Hoover Institution
- National Rifle Association
- Ludwig von Mises Institute
- Citizens Against Government Waste
- National Center for Policy Analysis
- The Heartland Institute
Our Mission
"The Patriot's mission is to advocate for Essential Liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and to promote free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values. Our objective is to provide Patriots across our nation with a touchstone of First Principles through brief, informative and entertaining analyses of relevant news, policy and opinion from reputable research, advocacy and media organizations, so they may better support and defend those Principles, and enlist others to join our ranks." —Mark Alexander, Publisher
The Patriot Post is not sustained by any political, special interest or parent organization, and we accept no advertising. Our mission and operations are funded entirely by the voluntary financial support of Patriots like you!
























g.wegmann
In 1994 then-first lady Hillary Clinton, who headed the administration's task force on reforming the system, delivered a 1,000-page plan that was dubbed "Hillary Care," which required Americans and permanent resident aliens to enroll in a health plan. Other provisions included Americans below a certain income level paying nothing for care.It was all crafted behind closed doors as was the Democrats health plan this time. Maybe the Obama administration should get the messagethat Americans realize that his promise to have an open and transparent administration was just another lie told to get him elected!
During the Clinton years, Republicans decried the plan as overcomplicated and used it to tag the administration as big government-loving, tax-and-spend liberals.Compared with the over 2000 page monstrosity that the Democrats crafted in 2009 it was small! And the cost of the Democrat Health Care bill that will leave thousands still uncovered is too much for OUR failing economy to bear.
Posted February 19, 2010 at 9:26:19 AM
MelP
Misery and Suffering (poverty) is directly proportional to the funds set aside for its relief. Entitlements are causing people to become parasitic and will destroy the host! Let's not let our congressmen continue buying goodwill. The greatest charity is to give a person a good job and yes work is honorable. Let's also stop them from receiving entitlements voted for themselves only. Maybe they are the parasites? Let's clear foggy bottom? How? November 2010!
Posted February 19, 2010 at 10:24:16 AM
MelP
The Law of the Host.....when you have a fully parasitic non-cooperative relationship, the parasite will destroy the Host. Entitlements??
A parasite.......when you provide any species of life with safety, shelter, and food, without that species of life exercising mental thought or physical muscle, it causes injury to body parts, loss of body parts and in humankind, often the loss of moral character.
Faith has three elements...... Knowledge of certain facts, belief that those facts are true and trust, willing to risk something precious. Do you have faith in your congressman; do you have faith in their representation based on your first hand information? Are you willing to risk your vote in 2010? Think! Learn the facts!
Misery and Suffering (poverty) is directly proportional to the funds set aside for its relief. Entitlements are causing people to become parasitic and will destroy the host! Let's not let our congressmen continue buying goodwill. The greatest charity is to give a person a good job and yes work is honorable.
Posted February 19, 2010 at 10:28:22 AM
Marcus
wonder how much it cost America for the last year's waste of government time?
Posted February 19, 2010 at 4:03:02 PM
MichaelSSEC
After the 08 election, Liberal crowed and strutted, and proclaimed, "We won! It's OUR country now!"
Americans begged to differ. Leftists stubbornly insisted America was no longer the United States of America, but the Liberal States of America. Newsweek boldly declared "We're all Socialists now!"
Americans went out and protested. Leftists called them names, lied about demonstrators being Nazis and racists, and continued to insist that the "bad old" America was dead -- replaced with a new Social Democracy, a central planning paradise.
Americans showed up at Town Hall meetings to express increasing anger at these radical Leftists. Liberals called them morons and attached a sexually-charged disparaging pseudonym to the citizens trying to make Congressmen understand just how badly they had miscalculated. Barney Frank's scolding of a constituent embodied the arrogance of the Left, as he said speaking to her was like "talking to a table leg, I have no interest in doing it, madame."
Americans marched on Washington DC in the hundreds of thousands -- and millions. Liberals pretended to be unaware of the protest, while simultaneously labeling the demonstrators as racists and possibly domestic terrorists. There were few (if any) arrests, and very little litter -- in contrast with the average Leftist demonstration in which scores of arrests follow violent rampages by masked thugs, millions of dollars in property damage, piles of trash everywhere, drugs and disgusting behavior.
Americans voted for Republicans in three key races. Liberals blamed anything and everyone, even the earthquake in Haiti, as they grasped after excuses to explain away their defeats. Obama even claimed people were sick to death of Republican failures -- so naturally they voted for Republicans in ultra-Liberal Massachusetts.
At this rate, by the end of this year, Liberals will be blaming UFOs, bigfoot, ghosts, and bad karma for their whopping failures and blistering defeats. After the 2010 mid-terms, the Democrats will be so desperate to explain their misfortune with taking any responsibility themselves, they'll become even more shrill, more irrational, more angry. The more they scream, the more the American people get to see what the Liberals are really made of: lies, bile and sleaze.
There's nothing wrong with America or the Constitution except those who say there's something fundamentally wrong with America and the Constitution. We don't need a "living document." We don't need a parliamentary system. We don't need to rewrite the Senate's rules. We don't need to scrap the Electoral College. Instead, we need to throw out the bizarre and destructive idea that we can have something for nothing, that we can vote ourselves entitlements with no concern for how we shall pay for them.
Ted Nugent put it well. You want pursuit of happiness? Great! Just don't send me the bill. You want to pursue all the happiness you can handle, that's fine but when the bills come due you better not try to force everyone else to pay your way. Life doesn't work that way, nor should it.
Posted February 19, 2010 at 5:38:17 PM
Rich G.
Charles K.is my all time favorite. My wife and I watch the Fox news at 7pm mostly to see him and hear his opinions which invariably agree with my own.He of course puts it a much better form. Many times I've watched as Juan Williams makes a comment followed by Charles very softly saying"that's not so and Juan never says yes it is or any comment. Charles is one great reporter. Go get 'em Charles.
Posted February 20, 2010 at 9:31:57 PM
Richard K
The leadership we seek in matters of government from the office of President require a background of experience and development that were just not available to the incumbent. The political machine that succeeded in getting their candidate elected were themselves not prepared to recognize, let alone fill the 'empty resume' with genuine leadership skills. Many say he is a 'charming and intelligent person' but not one voice is heard to praise the absent leadership skills.
So 'we the people', the peasants, once again struggle onward hoping and yes praying for a return to a conservative non socialist approach to government that does not punish productivity and financial success. It is time for a job description for candidates to the Office of President that require leadership experience as a prerequisite to the holding of the office plus a mandate to honor promises to the electorate. Or is it to late to bother as we enter the slide to third world status where it is difficult to distinguish between the behavior of opposing parties and where deficit spending and corruption are a way of life.
And when will we, the peasants insist that deficit spending at all levels of government be made a crime, punishable by jail time...it is after all stealing from the next generation of Americans if that really matters to anyone.
Posted February 23, 2010 at 12:57:44 PM