Inexact Possibilities: Politics at the Cutting Edge
Creative Obstruction

The political fallout from Scott Brown’s insurgent win has me thinking about the nature of our democracy. The way the republic is set up, if a large enough group of legislators—say, hypothetically, the Senate Republican caucus—simply chooses not to negotiate in good faith with the other side, offering only ideological proposals that have no basis in reality—say, hypothetically, deficit reduction and no cuts to Medicare—they can completely obstruct the agenda of even a huge majority like that the Democrats currently have (and will continue to have, don’t let’s forget, even in the wake of the Brown-out).
There is a certain brash creativity to this.
The Republicans stated, quite loudly, as soon as President Obama announced his intention to pursue health care reform in early 2009, that they would kill it. Straight up said it. A moderate few pretended to negotiate, but according to Harry Reid “it was a waste of time dealing with [Republican Senator Olympia Snowe] because she had no intention of ever working anything out.” The GOP can claim to have offered alternative legislation, but look at Jim DeMint’s proposals and try to tell me with a straight face that they would solve any problems. You can’t.
The Republicans’ capacity to obstruct has much to do with Senate rules and procedures. Use of the filibuster has jumped to historical highs in the past few years. There are many people, myself included, who believe that America might be better off if the Senate were simply abolished. If wishes were horses…
The broader point is that American democracy is imperfect, and always will be. A small minority can, with audacity and consistency, stop the government in its tracks. That old dinosaur The Village Voice captured it best today with their headline: “Scott Brown Wins Mass. Race, Giving GOP 41-59 Majority in the Senate.”
All eyes now turn to Obama. His reaction will determine how the Democrats will govern with only a 19-seat majority in the Senate. I leave you, for a dash of hope, with Jonathan Chait:
Here is what I think will happen. The shock and panic will play itself out over a few days. Then the Democrats will assess the situation and realize that letting health care die represents their worst possible option. And then they will make a deal to pass the Senate bill through the House. I am not positive this will happen, but it’s my bet, because elected officials at the national level, dim though they can be, are usually shrewd enough to recognize their political self-interest.
In the meantime, the display of hysteria is actually disgusting.
January 20th, 2010 at 10:59 am
Hi. I am a long time reader. I wanted to say that I like your blog and the layout.
Peter Quinn
January 21st, 2010 at 9:12 am
[...] I wrote about the Republican strategy of stonewalling the President and the Democrats on every major policy issue. [...]
January 25th, 2010 at 11:39 am
[...] the Senate is the source of so many political problems, here’s a great idea, via James Fallows, for how to fix it: let’s rearrange all the [...]
January 31st, 2010 at 1:02 pm
Wow.
First you say
The GOP can claim to have offered alternative legislation, but look at Jim DeMint’s proposals and try to tell me with a straight face that they would solve any problems. You can’t.
Uh, this just in. Jim DeMint isn’t the ONLY Senator or Congressman who has provided alternatives. You, like the President, think erecting straw man arguments like this constitutes a sufficient response.
But that pales in comparsion to THIS statement.
There are many people, myself included, who believe that America might be better off if the Senate were simply abolished. If wishes were horses…
Unbelievable. Have you ever actually studied our constitutional government and why a bi-cameral legislative structure was established in the first place? And why the Founders, particularly the brilliant John Adams, were so adamant about putting in place two legislative bodies?
To PREVENT crazy insane legislation from being passes without deliberative discussion and broad consensus. The Founders WANTED a creaky, inefficient government. Because an efficient and smooth functioning government is potentially a DESPOTIC government.
It never ceases to amaze me how little the left knows about how things are supposed to work.
February 2nd, 2010 at 7:59 pm
[...] however, grievances don’t rest on the seventh day, and so on Sunday Mr. Keller returned, to an earlier post, to vent further frustrations regarding my alleged “intellectual [...]
March 22nd, 2010 at 2:33 pm
[...] saying today will be meaningless by tomorrow. They have no idea what they’re talking about! Remember when everyone was saying reform was dead after a moderate Republican beat a terrible Democratic party [...]