Sen. Mark Udall’s “Bipartisanship”

How well did Democratic Sen. Mark Udall’s idea that Democrats and Republican Teabaggers sit next to each other during the 2011 State of the Union address?

By any common sense approach, it was an abject failure.  Sure the Senators intermingled for one evening.  Then the Republican Teabaggers threatened to filibuster a record number of bills, nominees for posts were needlessly held up for months on end before being overwhelmingly approved once they allowed votes to come up.  Oh, there was also a “little hiccup” in the economy when those same Teabaggers threatened to not allow a vote to increase the federal debt ceiling, which resultedin a downgrade of the US credit rating.  That’s correct: the same targets of Udall’s goodwill took our economy to the edge of disaster for purely political reasons: if the economy tanks, President Obama would be unlikely to win reelection this year.

So how does Sen. Bipartisanship respond?  By re-issuing his silly call for Senators to sit together again this year and show Americans they can get along.  The Republican Teabaggers want to shut down the government and the economy, Senator Udall.  What is it going to take for you to accept that basic truth?

Senator, if you want to prove to Americans you and your colleagues can do your jobs, pass a jobs bill; pass a federal budget on time; let the Bush tax cuts expire as designed; confirm or deny nominees but make the votes happen.  Somehow I think running a campaign ad that one of your accomplishments was calling for Senators to sit together during a speech while tens of millions of Americans remained underemployed, losing their households and savings and health care and hope for the future, won’t win over too many voters.  Do something tangible, Senator.  No more empty gestures.  No more searching for the Holy Bipartisanship Grail.

Democrat’s Piss Poor Job

Kos nails it.

In addition to doing a piss poor job of passing the best legislation possible the last 20 months, Democrats have done a piss poor job of communicating the successes they have had. And, they’ve certainly blown properly branding Republicans with their unpopular agenda, because when polled specifically about Republican priorities, the public recoils in horror.

Exactly.  I think it’s too late for Dems this cycle to garner the support they’ll need to get re-elected.  Democratic voters are rightfully pissed that the agenda they were promised Obama and others would work on wasn’t worked on.  Instead, they got preemptive capitulation and Quests for the Holy Bipartisanship Grail.  If Democrats seriously wanted to be reelected, they had 20 months to prove it.  They didn’t and they’re facing the consequences now.

The Deficit Commission, Bipartisanship & Incrementalism

As President Obama’s deficit commission grows from an idea to actually considering policy recommendations, one of the co-chairs has, through his inartful and backwards thinking language, provided additional evidence why incrementalism and questing for the Holy Bipartisan Grail are both bad ideas.

I will state once again that all of today’s calls for deficit reduction are pure b.s.  Few, if any, of those calling for fiscal prudence were doing so during the Bush Regime.  Very little discussion was offered by the Very Serious People inside D.C. regarding Bush’s explosion of the federal debt from $5.73 Trillion to over $11 Trillion.  Now that it’s up to $12 Trillion, those same serious people have decided they want to hold this President’s spending accountable.  So the calls to rein in spending today hold no weight with me, especially since I was one of the few calling Bush’s out of control spending into question.

But I’m not going to waste much energy backing Obama up on this subject.  He and his team would prefer to continue many of the same counterproductive economic policies that Bush’s team, Clinton’s team, Bush Sr.’s team and Reagan’s team put into place.  I think Obama’s team is continuing along this path because of their desire to appear bipartisan.  In an age in which those same very serious people chatter about Obama’s deficit spending, they also make much of the partisanship of Washington.  Again, this comes about too late.  Democrats didn’t run around for eight years screaming that anyone who disagreed with them were traitors to their country; the Republicans did.

Instead of standing up to the very serious people and reminding them that they won the 2008 elections quite handily, Obama’s team instead has chosen to roll over at the feet of their accusers and try to make nice with them.  Listening to alternative viewpoints is one thing.  But when Obama himself uses language like “drove the car into the ditch” and “we won’t give them (the Republicans) the keys back”, then establishes a deficit reduction commission and stuffs it full of people who have spent their political careers calling for an end to programs like Social Security, one wonders what his agenda truly is.  If he believed his rhetoric, he might listen to such talk, but rightfully cast it aside as the extremist viewpoint that it is.  Instead, he coddles it.

For those who advocate for incrementalism and bipartisanship, as was the case during the Health Care Insurance Debate of 2009-2010, allow me to ask you this.  How far are you willing to push such approaches?  Health care might be one thing.  But what happens when Obama’s commission calls for a reduction in Social Security payouts or another increase in retirement age to qualify for full benefits, all while the War Department spends billions a year on unregulated mercenaries as part of its overseas and domestic campaigns, all while Bush’s tax cuts for the super-rich get extended?  How many of you will continue to stand behind Obama then?  Will you be proud to call yourself a Democrat when a Democratic President does what no Republican President dared to do?  Or will you instead begin to listen to more progressive voices in holding Democrats accountable for their actions in the same way that we wanted Bush and the Republicans accountable for theirs?

Sen. Mark Udall Pushes National RES. But Where Is The Bipartisanship?

Sen. Mark Udall has done a functional job in his first term as Colorado’s senior Senator.  Far from leveraging his huge bases of support in the Denver-Boulder metro area, Sen. Udall has made more effort to reach across the aisle to the psychotic Cons of the 111th Congress who have ground the U.S. Senate to a near halt.  I have argued in numerous posts in plain and simple terms why this is such a bad idea.  To date, and in extreme summary form, we have a half-assed Stimulus Bill, a Health Care Insurance Bill Giveaway, a Wall St. Reform Scott Free Bill and no Climate and Energy Bill.  This situation largely exists because people like Sen. Udall and President Obama want to spend more time chasing the Holy Bipartisan Grail than passing powerful progressive legislation that might actually move this country forward in this 21st century.  To be clear, I do not consider either man to be a progressive; nor did I consider them to be so prior to the 2008 election.  The place I’m arguing from is that this country badly needs progressive legislation and we’re ill-served by the current crop of politicians who don’t care that the Senate is broken.

Recently, Sen. Udall announced that he really, really badly wants a National 25% Renewable Energy Standard by 2025 bill passed during this session of Congress.  That’s fair enough, I suppose.  Sen. Udall did establish some credentials as an environmental advocate in the state of Colorado and during his time as 2nd district Representative in the House.  But, as I’ve also argued in numerous posts, the U.S. Senate is where good legislation goes to die.  By moving from his base of support and joining the Quest for the Holy Bipartisan Grail in the Senate, I challenge the Senator on his calls for an RES.  If he’s not serious about truly enacting such a policy, or if he wants to give utilities policies they support in return for weakening the RES in any way, I’m not interested in listening to his announcements.

President Obama Puts Focus On Wrong Issue

I caught this headline and quickly clicked to read the short tidbit on it:

Obama: ‘Left-wing groups’ should back off.

Here’s the bulk of what else was written:

The President discussed how the current tone and culture in Washington made it more difficult than it has been in the past to work in a bipartisan fashion. In particular, he singled out Republican Senators who are trying to work in a bipartisan fashion even in the context of a vocal minority in their party who doubt that the President was born in the US. In this context about the less productive tone of the debate in Washington, he said he didn’t like to see ‘left wing groups attack fellow Democrats’.

Mr. President, you’re wrong about this.  There is no other way to describe it.  Where is your condemnation of right-wing, corporate ads attacking Congressional legislation?

Why is Washington less bipartisan than it used to be?  Because Republicans have been replaced with extremist Cons.  Democrats have gotten steadily more moderate in the past 30 years, trying to track down the elusive Holy Bipartisan Grail, to no avail.  The American people are fed up with Con policies – they want progressive legislation passed and many of us aren’t afraid to call ConservaDems to task for working harder to find the Grail than they are on writing good legislation.  ConservaDems are also working harder for their corporate benefactors than they are for their constituents.

ConservaDems and Cons are working to enact health insurance “reform”, not health care reform (I hope most of us recognize the critical differences).  What possible use do Americans have with a plan that will force them to pay for insurance but not receive the care they deserve?!  These limp noodles have accepted millions upon millions of dollars from corporations.  What true incentive to they have to write good legislation if the people stand on the sidelines?

Republican Senators (Cons) aren’t trying to work in a bipartisan fashion.  They’re trying to slow down bills’ progress long enough so that it is effectively killed, because they don’t want the public record of having voted against real health care reform.  The Cons have no interest in ever voting for the bills that they’re working to water down.  What Con will vote for the bill, Mr. President?  Can you tell us that?  Have Con Senators promised you they’ll vote for it if they can just work on it a few weeks or a few months longer?  Who are they?  What concessions need to be given up?  No, sir, there are no such Cons.

Which is why progressive advocacy groups are running ads against politicians who found it convenient to put a ‘D’ after their name.  They’re not writing what Americans have said in overwhelming numbers for years they want.  It’s time to put up or shut up.  Put a piece of legislation together and let’s have the freaking vote on it already.  And please stop chasing the Holy Bipartisan Grail.  It doesn’t exist.  When reasonable Republicans take their party back over, we can have honest, bipartisan debates about substantive policy.  Until then, don’t acknowledge the Cons’ insanity.