Nov 26, 2014

150-to-1 Reasons To Be THANKFUL

By · Leave a Comment

Sometimes the stars align. Sometimes your best efforts can make a difference. Sometimes you’re just in the right place at the right time. Tomorrow is Thanksgiving and this is the 150th post I have written for Sparky’s Policy Pub.

I had thought, for a brief moment mind you, of coming up with 150 different healthcare policy oriented reasons for being thankful and sharing them. But if there is one thing I have learned too well over the past 149 posts it’s that in a world of electronic media expanding at an accelerated rate it is extremely difficult to attract the attention of anyone interested in reading a paragraph – let alone a boring list – on public policy issues.

So I settled upon one policy-oriented reason to be thankful that is both timely and in keeping with the American heritage and tradition of Thanksgiving: I am thankful the Tea Party has gone into hiding, at least for now.

Writing this morning in Politico, Kyle Cheney asks the question: Is the tea party ready to chill out? Cheney posits that at least some portion of the Republican Party’s success is owing to their being able to smartly steer clear of TP challengers that historically have split the party against itself. And rather than swinging for the fences on every issue at least some TP strategists appear to be taking a more pragmatic approach, accepting that getting something – anything – is a lot better than getting nothing.

The Democratic Party is going to face its own fringe albatross dividing its constituency in the years ahead, particularly leading into the 2016 election. And their situation may be even worse because of some recent success the far left has had in influencing legislation. They have come to taste an unsustainable success that the Tea Party by and large has not. That will, of course, change, as Chuck Schumer and others have already begun signaling as they start to distance themselves from the party’s far left.

Politics in America can often best be characterized as a pendulum of public opinion: as the public comes to realize their lives are not better under one party they begin to have hope in the other. Of course, overall voter turnout earlier this month – at 36.4% – was the lowest it has been since 1942, perhaps an indication that 6 or 7 out of every 10 Americans have lost hope in either or any party, or could really care less about public policy until it is in some fashion proven to affect them directly.

That lack of interest in public policy is in good part because it has been overwrought by the rancor smell of partisan politics in an age of media-driven elections. The media’s complicity is our own: we like to be entertained, as I have written here before. Just ask ad agents at Fox News or MSNBC what type of programming advertisers will pay the highest rates to underwrite. Entertainment is found on the fringes of both parties because their behavior is usually characterized as aggressive, controversial and uncompromising.

But it’s the very lack of compromise that has thrown this country into a political tailspin. Without wanting to find myself disappointed to the point of joining the 7 out of 10 who don’t care what happens in public policy I hope the Republican Party’s ability to gain control of Congress is a harbinger of future hard fought debates on the floors of both chambers that will result in legislation that neither party loves but both can live with in the interest of knowing that doing something is better than doing nothing.

It will be interesting to see whether the likes of Ted Cruz, whose star for better or worse is at least for now firmly affixed to the Tea Party, will choose personal political ambition over progress and seek to make the 114th Congress as dysfunctional as the few before. Who wants to bet he’ll choose the road of constructive compromise? I’ll give you 150-to-1.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Cheers,
  Sparky

Filed Under: Editorials & Opinions, Tea Party · Tagged: , , , ,
Dec 12, 2013

They Did What ?!?!

By · Leave a Comment

Don’t look now, but something remarkable happened in Washington today: both political parties claimed they weren’t happy with a bill but passed it anyway. That’s what used to be known as compromise in Congress. And for House Speaker Boehner the House support he received was a well-deserved reward for having been put through a lot of – well, stuff.

I think he must be either trying to save his political life, discounting the value of it – or being sincerely candid. At a year-end press conference today he was openly critical of conservative organizations that have been the biggest obstacle to bipartisan compromise this country has seen since just before the Civil War, noting they have “lost all credibility” in being critical of a bipartisan budget deal before it was even released.

In obvious anger and frustration he accused – without identifying any groups in particular – those organizations that have hamstrung his speakership as “misleading their followers,” saying that, “I think they’re pushing our members in places where they don’t want to be, and frankly I just think that they’ve lost all credibility.”

On the budget bill, the Speaker noted it wasn’t everything Republicans would have hoped for, but it “takes giant steps in the right direction.” Wait. You mean like making a deal in the interest of your constituents instead of yourselves? Go on. Boehner went on to say that, “I came here to cut the size of government. That’s exactly what this bill does, and why conservatives wouldn’t vote for this, or [would] criticize the bill is beyond any recognition I could come up with.”

I’ve got a potential reason, Mr. Speaker. It’s because in the aspirational views of certain Republican opportunists that have jumped on the Tea Party bandwagon Democrats have the wicked wiles.  Remember this from Snow White?

Grumpy: Angel, ha! She’s a female! And all females is poison! They’re full of wicked wiles!
Bashful: What are wicked wiles?
Grumpy: I don’t know, but I’m agin’ ’em.

Thus the Tea Party and that ilk spent most of 2013 trying mightily to transform the Republican Party from the Party of No to the Party of Anarchy. But alas, with the passage of today’s two-year budget deal it would appear the Republican Party may have broken free of those reactionary shackles. With only 62 Republican defections, the House appeared to brush off criticism and partisan threats from conservative groups like Heritage Action and Club for Growth.

And kudos to Rep. Paul Ryan for saying that,“elections have consequences … to really do what we think needs to be done, we’re going to have to win some elections. And in the meantime, let’s try to make this divided government work.”

Let me attempt to restate that in a different manner: In a democracy, being a minority political party by only a very narrow margin is a frustrating position. There are two approaches to deal with that frustration: obstinate immaturity or constructive pragmatism. The Tea Party has favored the former. Today the Republican Party chose the latter. Without having to change their core beliefs they are a step closer today than they were yesterday to winning the elections Paul Ryan noted.

Cheers,
  Sparky

Filed Under: Editorials & Opinions, Tea Party · Tagged: , , , ,
What’s Next for the Tea Party?
Oct 17, 2013

What’s Next for the Tea Party?

By · 2 Comments

550px-Remove-a-Stuck-Tongue-from-a-Frozen-Surface-Step-3One might think the graphic accompanying this post was leaked from Sen. Ted Cruz’s political strategy playbook: the next chapter in The Tea Party’s Fight to Repeal the Affordable Care Act. It’s not. Could be though, right? The metaphor holds of doing something foolish to gain popular attention and then suffering the individual consequences of that foolishness.

Of course, Tea Party advocates will no doubt claim I am being foolishly satirical and hypocritical for not recognizing my own ignorance in understanding the dramatic importance of standing up for liberty, fiscal responsibility and apple pie. If they truly believe those were Senator Cruz’s motivations, well then what can I say – they must see a political reality in this country different than the one I see.

Even if we were to believe the efforts of Senator Cruz and other Tea Party congressional enthusiasts – to hold the country fiscally hostage for over two weeks in an effort to defund the ACA – were nonpolitically motivated, the overall reaction of the American public can hardly be what they were hoping for. According to a Pew Research Center poll released yesterday, the Tea Party is less popular than ever, even among many Republicans, with nearly half (49%) of survey respondents having an unfavorable opinion. This is up from 37% in June of this year.

On the other hand, Senator Cruz’s popularity among Tea Party respondents has risen from 47% to 74% since July. I’m not sure how well that bodes for his future political aspirations (at least outside of Texas, if that was of interest), but I am being sincere when I say that I respect the all-in approach of any elected official because it represents a refreshing departure from governing by opinion polls.

My view of the Tea Party, for better or worse, is largely based on the individuals I know personally who are either sympathetic to, intellectually aligned with or proud to be members. I find them to be generally well informed on political issues and passionate about protecting individual liberties. Things go downhill when we start debating who gets to define which liberties should be protected and by whom, which I interpret as the Tea Party being discerningly different than many Libertarian viewpoints.

They are very concerned – and I think rightly so – with the economic future of our country and seem to understand more than most that both political parties are guilty of sustaining special-interest budgeting despite whatever expressions of concern we may hear to the contrary. That’s where a large part of the inherent challenge to the Tea Party’s future lies. As shown in the Pew Research poll, there is a lot of confusion, disagreement and debate over whether and how well the Tea Party “fits” within the Republican Party.

I personally hope it finds its national voice apart from the GOP. If it has something meaningful to offer in the nation’s political discourse – it could hardly do worse – then it should seek to do so through the existing construct of our democracy and not by resorting to Machiavellian tactics whereby it seeks to bend the will of a majority to its beliefs (again, I refer you to the Pew Research poll).

I admit, there is a real attraction to a grass roots political movement in an age where electoral helplessness – whether learned or systemic – has become anathema to a democratic form of government. But waxing nostalgic for the 18th century and expecting that same apathetic electorate to embrace the social and cultural norms of men in wigs and women in hoops is a very tough sell.

And that’s where I find the greatest difficulty in accepting my Tea Party colleagues’ personal political platform. To me it feels like hidden below the surface of, “strike a blow for liberty,” “defend the Constitution” and “balance the budget” is an observable pattern in their logic and debate that belies a commiserate longing for the good old days.

I think all of us over a certain age find ourselves quite often reflecting on a past that was less stressful, less fearful, less threatening and certainly less complicated. Today we live in a world of constant change that just one generation removed couldn’t possibly have imagined. In his book, Managing at the Speed of Change, Daryl Conner talks about the Beast: a metaphor of the challenge each of us faces in adapting to constant change in our environment. It takes incredible resiliency to maintain good mental health in the 21st century.

I do not believe effective public policy – including Healthcare policy – can or should be based on what worked in the good old days. As Don Henley wrote, “those days are gone forever – [we] should just let ‘em go but…” Today we live in a society that is aging at an accelerated rate, that is growing in ethnic and cultural diversity and is inundated on a 24-7 basis with technological advancements that introduce hope and terror in equal measures.

With that understanding of reality, my primary concern with the Tea Party is the perceived sense of moral intransigence and impractical political dogma that transcends their beliefs. We should be focusing our efforts on how best to practically adapt a constitutional style of government to the world we live in today – not expecting today’s society to mirror that of the 1700s. I think I share just as much angst and anxiety over our nation’s future as do my Tea Party colleagues. I just don’t believe that going backwards offers much hope in addressing the problems we face today and tomorrow.

Cheers,
  Sparky

Filed Under: Editorials & Opinions, Tea Party · Tagged: , , ,