Luminaries such as Charles Krauthammer and Rush Limbaugh have suggested the possibility of Republicans responding to the looming “Fiscal Cliff” by taking a page out of Barack Obama’s playbook and simply voting “present” to whatever the President proposes as a solution. These gentlemen more eloquently propound the same thoughts I reflected on in my blog from a few weeks ago, “Releasing the Prodigal”. I won’t restate those points, but go into the archives if you missed it.
Given the state of the Republican Party, a President whose new governing style borders on machismo, and an electorate who’s had about enough of all this; and it would seem there are really only two possible outcomes. Either the Republican house will essentially cave, arriving at a “deal” at the midnight hour that gives the President most of what he is asking for, while providing enough token concessions to the Republicans to label it a bipartisan compromise; or, Boehner is unable to persuade enough of his members to go along to get along, the house stands firm, and we go right over the dreaded Fiscal Cliff. Either way, the President wins, and the Republicans lose, again.
Clearly, President Obama believes that, like Al Qaeda, the G.O.P. is on the run. His “negotiating” technique seems to be, “If you don’t take my first offer, the next one will cost you more” as he has nearly doubled the tax hikes he is requesting since his last proposal, and it would seem “millionaires and billionaires” are anyone who earns more than $250,000/yr. now. Increasingly, Republicans are acting as though they are seeing the writing on the wall (or more likely the writing in the New York Times), and are listing to the left, looking to salvage any vestige of power in compromise that they can hopefully parlay into re-election in the next go-round. In the end, they will appear weak, broken, and inconsequential.
Negotiations are more difficult in the House. There is not just one arrogant bastard to deal with; there are 435. Anything can happen with these guys, and “leadership” is a term used loosely. Boehner is an establishment Republican and stands on political pragmatism more than principle, but the question is whether he can convince an adequate number of his members to follow him into a cave. If not, this is one place the President is not likely to bow. In fact, going over the cliff might suit him just fine.
What exactly would no deal do? Well, tax rates would go up on everyone… um, at least everyone who pays taxes. That means even more money for the government to redistribute or spend to help remold society nearer to their heart’s desire. The sequestration of military spending will cut defense spending by billions; defense cuts are something Democrats usually have to fight for and risk losing votes and political capital over; this would be a free gift. If the economy tanked because of the higher taxes, and Democrats may not believe it actually would, but it could easily be blamed on the Republicans. There would be more angry poor people in need of government help, and which party do you think they would lean toward?
Meanwhile, all these Republicans are running from their “Taxpayer Protection Pledge” of not supporting any tax increases. The President insists that he was elected because of his promise to raise taxes on the rich, and Republicans are cowering as they believe this might be true. Conservative commentator Bill Kristol has suddenly seen the light, and asks why Republicans should fall on their swords for a few rich people, many of whom are in Hollywood and vote Democrat anyway. Senators and Representatives are finding all manner of convoluted excuses to weasel out of their oath, now that it seems politically poisonous to maintain such a rigid standard. Possibly one of the most curious explanations comes from one of our local representatives, Chris Gibson from the 20th, now 19th district. Because of redistricting, beginning in 2013 Gibson will be serving a slightly different group of constituents, and he is using this as an excuse not to re-sign the pledge… information that might have been useful BEFORE the election. I had thought Chris was made of better stuff.
IMHO: In the end every strategy seems to be a losing one for the G.O.P. The Republicans could honor their pledge, and their rhetoric by simply standing down and refusing to participate in what they claim will be detrimental to the economy. Let the Democrats own this in its entirety, and then fix the mess later. Don’t vote yes, don’t vote no, vote present… or don’t vote at all. Just the threat of this in negotiations (and even the terms of this non-vote would need to be negotiated, it’s not a blank check) might be enough to change the dynamics entirely. Neither party likes to “own” legislation completely, especially if it can be deemed to be potentially detrimental. President Obama was disingenuous when he said that raising taxes on anyone was not a good idea in a fragile economy, as he is proving in the present negotiations. If Republicans believe their own forecasts of doom they cannot voluntarily cooperate in the harmful policy, even in the form of a nominal compromise. It is time to put aside the tremulous timidity of shaken confidence from a traumatic election cycle, and instead to rise like men and women, having the courage of convictions, and the belief that truth will always emerge like the sun from the clouds of lies. Sometimes the strength of our position is discovered in the exercise of patience and faith in the power of what is right. Bishop Fulton Sheen said it best,
“Patience is power.
Patience is not an absence of action; rather it is “timing”.
It waits on the right time to act, for the right principles, and in the right way.”
All of Washington thinks that if the world doesn’t end as the Mayans indicated on December 21st, it will surely end ten days later at the Fiscal Cliff. Surely the world will one day end, but not so soon I think. Patience. Timing. Action. Don’t worry, don’t hurry… the passing of time is always on the side of truth.
