By David Harsanyi
Wednesday, October 02, 2013
Hitting legend Stan Musial once allegedly declared that
the “first principle of contract negotiations is don’t remind them of what you
did in the past; tell them what you’re going to do in the future.” That neatly
sums up how liberals would like to treat these budget /debt ceiling showdowns.
Take for example:
Serious Q: Has any R explained cogently *why* Ds should give Rs unilateral concessions in exchange for funding gov at sequester levels?
Now, if history had kicked off five minutes ago this
would be a reasonable question, but since politics is a continuum and Obamacare
doesn’t exist in a vacuum it’s a misleading one.
In reality, the only characteristic of the Affordable
Care Act that’s “unilateral” is the manner in which it was passed; without
consensus and without the minimal compromises that would have rendered
long-term Republican opposition to Obamacare untenable. If Democrats had, back
in 2009-2010, capitulated on one or two conservative objectives – out-of-state
insurance markets or tort reform, for instance – this moment would be
impossible.
Today, left-wing pundits wring their hand about partisan
inflexibility and conventional wisdom of the media has coagulated around the
“hostage taking” storyline. Back then, they were less concerned the health of
Washington. Any alleged concessions made by the Administration in 2010 were
aimed at corralling wayward Red State Democrats, resulting in the removal of
the public option and the adding of bogus guarantees on abortion funding. And
any concessions on bringing the price tag below a trillion dollars – a claim
that was a specious even then – was necessary to try and close the deal with the
public. When one party dictates every term of a massive reform effort, the
inevitable result is what we’re seeing today.
Which bring us to a related talking point: Embedded in
one of the most painful misinterpretations of the Federalist Papers you may ever
read, James Downie of the Washington Post writes:
Here are the facts, Republicans: The legislative branch passed the Affordable Care Act. The executive branch signed it into law. The judicial branch upheld it as constitutional. The American people voted to reelect the president who championed it. Since the act was passed, Americans who favor and/or want the law expanded have consistently outnumbered those who oppose the law. And now Americans are already clearly opposed to Republicans’ shutdown tactics. If this were a game, we’d call the result a blowout.
No doubt many of you may quibble with Downie’s assertion
about the law’s popularity, but generally speaking he’s right — and none of it
matters.
DOMA passed with a 342–67 margin in the House and a 85–14
margin in the Senate, yet it was consistently challenged in the courts and by
politicians. Citizens United was found constitutional and almost immediately
the president attacked the Court. (As you know, some decisions are more sacred
than others.) Americans twice elected a president who championed the Iraq War
and yet progressives never stopped opposing it. In 2001, No Child Left Behind
passed the House by a 384–45 and the Senate 91–8 margin. Yet, almost
immediately liberal groups, and soon after elected officials, began their
attempts to dismantle it.
Democrats had every right to engage in those pursuits. In
fact, it’s healthy that they did. Health-care legislation isn’t chiseled into
stone tablets and it’s not enshrined in the Constitution. The entire Obamacare
legislation was a “concession” by conservatives. So even if Republicans tactics
are unwise politics, trying to renegotiate and undo the majority’s will is not
unprecedented. And to argue about what’s going without perspective is
unrealistic.
No comments:
Post a Comment