Friday, December 09, 2005
Big Day In Washington Yesterday
The NYTimes put up a couple of stories during the day yesterday that brightened my day when I saw them.
The radically left-wing in the Senate threaten filibuster, but most there seem confident that such could readily be overcome if it actually materializes. Opposition to the Patriot act always frames itself in terms of personal liberty, a fact which amazes me since they are the same people that would legislate against "hate-speech." It's not about personal liberty, it's about certain liberties that they think inviolate.
The other story isn't done yet, but it's an important step in the journey
Anybody that would oppose this doesn't quite understand what has fueled our economy these last years.
Now, a political observation. Both these stories involve compromises that are time-based. The tax cuts cease in 5 years -- the controversial portions of the Patriot Act expire in four years. These time-based compromises bother me. They grant too much to the Dems. It means the Republicans still have to do all the work, despite the fact that the Republicans are in charge. To my way of thinking, if the Democrats do manage to regain the majority, they should have to work to implement their agenda rather than just achieve it by default.
But more, implicit in such compromises is that the way things used to be is normative and the current policies are abberations. In other words, the Republicans don't really have the strength of their convictions. Such compromises never really resolve the central issue, they just grant who's in charge at the moment, and in this case they admit that Democrats in charge is the default condition.
It's been a long time since a political party has enjoyed the full majorities Republicans now have. When will they figure out that means they are really and truly in charge?
The radically left-wing in the Senate threaten filibuster, but most there seem confident that such could readily be overcome if it actually materializes. Opposition to the Patriot act always frames itself in terms of personal liberty, a fact which amazes me since they are the same people that would legislate against "hate-speech." It's not about personal liberty, it's about certain liberties that they think inviolate.
The other story isn't done yet, but it's an important step in the journey
Anybody that would oppose this doesn't quite understand what has fueled our economy these last years.
Now, a political observation. Both these stories involve compromises that are time-based. The tax cuts cease in 5 years -- the controversial portions of the Patriot Act expire in four years. These time-based compromises bother me. They grant too much to the Dems. It means the Republicans still have to do all the work, despite the fact that the Republicans are in charge. To my way of thinking, if the Democrats do manage to regain the majority, they should have to work to implement their agenda rather than just achieve it by default.
But more, implicit in such compromises is that the way things used to be is normative and the current policies are abberations. In other words, the Republicans don't really have the strength of their convictions. Such compromises never really resolve the central issue, they just grant who's in charge at the moment, and in this case they admit that Democrats in charge is the default condition.
It's been a long time since a political party has enjoyed the full majorities Republicans now have. When will they figure out that means they are really and truly in charge?
