Skip to content

Pick Your Batt– Wait, I Have to Fight?

December 20, 2010

Earlier in the month, I noted that the Republicans were claiming that they’d stand against the hordes of oncoming bills to pass. It apparentlly lasted a whole three weeks, and now they forgot about it. Wiliam Jacobson at Legal Insurrection noticed it too.

It looks like a deal to extend funding through early March will pass this week, but it has not passed yet. 

Republicans need to start meaning what they say.  When Republicans say no votes until tax rates and the budget resolution are passed, that means no votes until tax rates and the budget resolution are passed.

DREAM act (which went down), DADT, a few others… they all survived filibuster, and went on to voting.  They even passed the silly Food Safety Act onto the house after some fun with the Constitution…

So, people, what gives?  If you’re going to pledge to focus on the big things, why didn’t you focus on the big things?

This is the fun part of leadership.  You have to make a commitment and then stick to it, even if it’s unpleasant.  In the case of the Republicans, it probably meant that they’d all be doing their own version of Planes, Trains, Automobiles to get home for Christmas.  But at the same time, they said they were going to stick to it, and they didn’t.  Stuff like this will stick in people’s memory, at least just enough for the people to remember why their approval ratings are so low.

Sure the reasons are good.  In the case of the Food Safety Act, go read Ed Morrisey’s take.  On the others, the Republicans had trouble holding a coalition.  This isn’t the way to inspire people, and it will likely be seen as a sign of weakness that either the minority Democrats or the Obama Administration will use as a wedge in the next year.

So this isn’t a catastrophic loss, but I do wonder when I can next believe anything the Republicans in congress say for more than three weeks?

2 Comments leave one →
  1. December 20, 2010 12:51 pm

    My concern about the upcoming session in Salem is based upon the type of observation you make here; we have the votes to demand motion from the Left, but there will always be one or two Republicans attempting to either be too cute by half, or a statesman, to allow the numbers to work for our benefit.

    For all those Tea Party guys, the next twelve months will either make or break a possible partnership with the Republican Party. The question will be whether the individual members of the legislature see themselves as having been elected under the promise of certain performance, or as having an elevated status as a consequent to their election that allows them to disregard the views and beliefs of their electorate and sally forth on an individual path? Compromise, statesmanship, legacy. Ah! to be a god.

    • December 20, 2010 1:23 pm

      As an elected “employee of the people,” it’s required that you be extremely confident that what you do represents the will of those who will elect you again. If you guess wrong, you have a new job…

      What gets me about this is the fact that many politicians seems to favor the latter, which usually means they’re shocked when the people get angry for the mis-representation.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: