![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
johnpalmerIn 1994, the Republicans decided they were going to push all out to take Congress. And among their strategies was to tie up all legislation near the election. "See, the government is useless and messed up - might as well put us anti-government types in charge!"
So the Senate Republicans started filibustering *everything*. Because they could, you see. There's no law against it.
I remember one of Heinlein's books, a young man was, through a ridiculous set of coincidences, forced to become captain of a space vessel because he was the only one who could perform astrogation. The captain, all the ships officers agreed, needed to understand this primary function, or could make crucial mistakes through a lack of understanding.
Well - he was the only astrogator when there were normally two, plus the captain. So he realized he needed a cot in the control room - otherwise he'd get no sleep. He was told that it was a very bad precedent, not exactly illegal, but it Just Wasn't Done. So he had them post the relevant regulations, and then, post his order temporarily suspending those due to the current emergency.
Would a young man with so little experience really *get* the importance of doing something like that? I don't know but I did like the little life's lesson thrown out. Sometimes one really does have to break the rules, but one should do so mindfully, so that it's limited.
I claim that this was the Republicans big, no, huge, mistake in the '94 midterms. They didn't specify that "okay, we'll use the power of the Senate to stop doing the country's business, in order to obtain a partisan advantage - this should never, ever be done, but we'll do it, just this once."
Let's debate whether using one's status as a Senator to partisan advantage is right, or a slimy, despicable, filthy, nasty thing to do later... but you might guess my position already.
Anyway: once you break regulations, without doing so mindfully, the question is now "why can't you do this again? Why was that time so different from this?" And that really is a fair question.
The point is, these things weren't done for a single part of a single year, to help win the mid-term elections. They've become commonplace. Republicans obstructed judicial nominations so routinely, that when they flat out say they won't do their job, for any nominee chosen by the current President, it's no longer really shocking. It's, you know, politics. A bit cold, but why is this such a big deal?
Why indeed?
People have used political power for partisan advantage before. But there's something just flat out wrong when Texas argues "there's nothing about *racism* in our changes to voting laws; we're just trying to shut out *Democrats* from the process; not blacks or other minorities!" It's even worse when that's just a single news cycle story. (And yes, this did happen.)
There's a certain tendency to seek balance, to say "both sides do it!" and it's true that there is no monopoly on corruption, partisanship, or plain old poison-mean with a side of stupidity.
But consider that if enough people follow that natural, human tendency to seek balance, to recognize that there is corruption in politics... well, wouldn't it be more easily possible for one party to get away with (metaphorical) murder, while the other is committing (metaphorical) grand menacing and occasionally assault?
So the Senate Republicans started filibustering *everything*. Because they could, you see. There's no law against it.
I remember one of Heinlein's books, a young man was, through a ridiculous set of coincidences, forced to become captain of a space vessel because he was the only one who could perform astrogation. The captain, all the ships officers agreed, needed to understand this primary function, or could make crucial mistakes through a lack of understanding.
Well - he was the only astrogator when there were normally two, plus the captain. So he realized he needed a cot in the control room - otherwise he'd get no sleep. He was told that it was a very bad precedent, not exactly illegal, but it Just Wasn't Done. So he had them post the relevant regulations, and then, post his order temporarily suspending those due to the current emergency.
Would a young man with so little experience really *get* the importance of doing something like that? I don't know but I did like the little life's lesson thrown out. Sometimes one really does have to break the rules, but one should do so mindfully, so that it's limited.
I claim that this was the Republicans big, no, huge, mistake in the '94 midterms. They didn't specify that "okay, we'll use the power of the Senate to stop doing the country's business, in order to obtain a partisan advantage - this should never, ever be done, but we'll do it, just this once."
Let's debate whether using one's status as a Senator to partisan advantage is right, or a slimy, despicable, filthy, nasty thing to do later... but you might guess my position already.
Anyway: once you break regulations, without doing so mindfully, the question is now "why can't you do this again? Why was that time so different from this?" And that really is a fair question.
The point is, these things weren't done for a single part of a single year, to help win the mid-term elections. They've become commonplace. Republicans obstructed judicial nominations so routinely, that when they flat out say they won't do their job, for any nominee chosen by the current President, it's no longer really shocking. It's, you know, politics. A bit cold, but why is this such a big deal?
Why indeed?
People have used political power for partisan advantage before. But there's something just flat out wrong when Texas argues "there's nothing about *racism* in our changes to voting laws; we're just trying to shut out *Democrats* from the process; not blacks or other minorities!" It's even worse when that's just a single news cycle story. (And yes, this did happen.)
There's a certain tendency to seek balance, to say "both sides do it!" and it's true that there is no monopoly on corruption, partisanship, or plain old poison-mean with a side of stupidity.
But consider that if enough people follow that natural, human tendency to seek balance, to recognize that there is corruption in politics... well, wouldn't it be more easily possible for one party to get away with (metaphorical) murder, while the other is committing (metaphorical) grand menacing and occasionally assault?
Re: Well...
Date: 2016-10-28 04:36 pm (UTC)Some young folks engage in criminal acts - and while the actions are deliberate, they are mistakes of judgment. So it wasn't an "accident" that they broke into the store to try to rob the safe, and it wasn't an accident when they fought with the owner to avoid getting caught, but if they'd talked out the possibilities with a friend who made them think it through - the owner *might* be there, and if he tries to catch them, the only way to avoid getting arrested *might* be to fight back - maybe seriously injuring or killing the owner - they'd have decided not to.
In that sense, I can see it as an accident. I think I've mentioned before that I think the fossil fuel companies may well have known global warming was real and pushed denialism in hopes of eking out a few more years of big profits before they were on the downslope. I think that was an accident too, *if* it was true.
(That no one has come up and admitted this by now suggests I am being naive, at least about the bigger decision makers. Or maybe loyalty is too strong to overcome via guilt, so far.)
The Republicans don't (I believe) want to cripple government. They just say they do as cover for what they *do* want to do. They want to use the levers of government to help out the big money boys - and saying they want "lower taxes" and "smaller government" and "fewer regulations" is just cover for them. I think many of them don't understand or care about the negative consequences of their actions. For example, they don't know any women who were in tears and contemplating suicide because they couldn't get an abortion - their women-friends could always take two days vacation, drive the 150 miles to the nearest Planned Parenthood clinic that performed them, ignore the mandated legal scolding, and come back the next day to have the procedure done.
I could be wrong - I tend to try to see the best in people, to look for reasons why something horrible isn't *as* horrible. So, admittedly, I'm not the best judge. But I do think it's important to see why a person isn't a monster in their own eyes, at the very least.
I think if Trump wins, the Republicans will finally decide that a massive infrastructure investment is a *great* idea, for example. I think they know it's needed - but they didn't want Obama to get credit for it.
I hope that this means if Hillary wins, they realize they can't wait another four years to do some things. And Hillary is (I believe) sharp enough to let them play the game of "see? We beat her! She didn't want X but we got it!" to some degree, to let them save face.