Be sure to read "My Life at Guantanamo" (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/08/opinion/sunday/my-guantanamo-nightmare.html?ref=todayspaper) to know why we should have confidence in both our judicial system and our jails to hold those guys who deserve to be held forever.
More importantly for this blog is the article in the Business Section written by a Professor of Behavioral Economics at my alma mater. It discusses how negotiation works to improve the welfare of all (involved in the negotiation) and what happens when negotiation breaks down. Either the deal collapses and the parties who disengage are left where they were, or a tit for tat develops and the welfare of all involved declines.
Of course, it is the latter where our national politics are today. And where they are likely to go over the rest of this year. However, national issues do not disappear the way a business deal does. They have to be dealt with sooner or latter.
Both the President and the Republicans need the other to get something in place to control the budget deficit and the cost of health care. (I think I will become like Susan Collins - who mentions Mitt taking the dog to Canada on the roof of his car every time she discusses him - and I will mention that the Affordable Health Care Act was at its core designed by the Heritage Foundation; a conservative think tank.)
They either deal this year through negotiation or risk the election going who knows what way and then having to deal with it next year. Do the Republicans think the Democrats will not use a scorched earth policy - as the Republicans have - to ruin a President Romney's presidency as a tit for tat for any Republican intransigence during Obama's Presidency? Do the Republicans think they will get a better deal from a reelected President Obama? Can the President afford not to try and cut a deal this year going into the election? Can the Congressional Democrats afford not to try and be responsible?
As a business person, I would want to cut a deal this year so I could be positive in front of my shareholders (i.e. voters). Alas, I do not see this happening this year, which means if it comes to pass, all tax rates will go up at the end of the year, the economy will suffer, and any boost to my personal savings from Romney's election will be wiped out by economic softness as political power seems to be more important then good governance.
The national level political discord is hurting all of us and it will not end unless both parties deal in the middle.
Lastly, there is an idea percolating that the Senate should pass a law calling for up and down votes within 90 days of anyone being nominated for a position and no filibuster could go beyond that as a failure to vote would be an automatic approval. The current position of keeping the President from appointing people to run things is not good governance. And it is not acceptable for either party to prevent a President from managing the government in an efficient manner.
No comments:
Post a Comment