Wednesday, May 23, 2012

Charles Parker: One-Party Government Will Get Things Done

The Congressional Budget Office announced this week that the economy would be shattered – at least temporarily - in the first quarter of 2013 if current policy stands.  President Obama and the Congress agreed earlier to increase tax rates and to implement $100 billion in spending cuts – mostly from the Department of Defense.  If this happens, the CBO predicts a growth rate of -1.3% (only in Washington can growth be measured in negative numbers).

There are four options – three of which we deserve for electing these bozos in the first place.  A fourth option is a roll of the dice.

First, Congress could simply let it happen.  Few that have spoken publically from Statuary Hall have advocated this course of action, but it is possible.  The reason we are in this pickle is because partisans (on both sides of the aisle, in both houses, and at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue) could not come to an agreement in the first place.  So – they could simply say – this is our agreement – so be it.

Second, Congress and the president could forge a new agreement soon – before the campaign heats up in the Fall.  Don’t hold your breath.  There are few statesmen and not nearly enough spines in DC to make the tough political choices that would have to be made.  And the president is out-of-town more than he is home.  The best CSI in the world would not be able to locate fingerprints on tax-and-spend legislation in an Election Year – even if it is months away.

Third, a lame duck session of Congress (with a potential lame duck president) could make changes in November and December.  This would be the most illegitimate of the choices as binding policy would be debated and decided by many who had been booted out or had chosen to leave because they might be booted out.  Lame duck sessions should not be used for major legislation – period.

Finally, Congress could wait until January – when the new group is sworn in – and when there might be a new resident in the White House.  For current members, this is a dicey proposition since no one knows what the majority will look like.   The GOP is worried that Democrats will let taxes go up and the Democrats are worried that the Pentagon won’t get its come-uppance if Republicans control.

The dysfunctionality of the current political situation makes Option Four the most optimum.
But through all of this I have come to another conclusion.  It makes no sense to have a divided government.  The framers did not set up the government to have checks and balances on partisanship.  They structured it to have checks and balances on power between the three branches.  Even with one-party partisanship, the checks and balances will still be implemented.  The Congress and the president and the courts can all make sure that all are within their constitutional limits.

And things will actually get done.

You can follow Charles Parker on Twitter @cpbrevard and on BlogTalkRadio from 8:00 - 8:30 pm Sunday evenings -

1 comment:

  1. Charles we saw the result of a one party Washington when the Dems had complete control from 2009 to 2011. They rammed things down our throats like Obama care and stimulus spending with no cares in the world. I for one would rather some things in Washington remain undone. By the way I was wondering how many times can you spend the same tax dollar? The reason I ask is because the Dems keep telling us they want to pay for their proposals with the same tax increase on the wealthy.