Thursday, November 10, 2011

Alan Caruba: What We Have Here is a Failure to Negotiate

Warning Signs  ..."The decision of the Democratic members of the Congressional Super Committee to refuse further discussion of revenue issues is a failure to negotiate."....
"When the news was reported on Wednesday that the Democratic members had walked away from the negotiation table, I picked up the phone to ask for his reaction.
" “We live in an era when the conventional wisdom is that compromise is the goal,” said Camp. “The real goal is a valid mission and purpose. What’s missing is that the committee as a whole is not focused on the real mission which is the best result for the American people and the nation. Instead, their goal is political gamesmanship, a massive over-reach by both parties to the negotiation.” "....
....
"Refusing to negotiate makes sense only if Democrats are positioning themselves to blame the Republicans for the failure to avoid another potential down-grade of the nation's credit rating. It's not the truth, but the truth is often a rare commodity in politics.
" “What we are witnessing,” said Camp, “is a textbook definition of incompetence.” "
(Emphasis added)

Below: there appears to be a theme here...
Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley
http://townhall.com/political-cartoons/

1 comment:

focusonzenergy said...

Connect these dots!
1.
Farming, food production and now fuel production is the only policy that ties all of America together in a non-partisan effort. Representatives from all 50 states, republican and democrat, serve exclusive agricultural constituencies. The partnership of agriculture and government has existed for hundreds of years in every country on the planet and their unifying goal is to provide food in a sustainable and ever growing industry to serve billions of inhabitants.
2.
It is an interesting observation that gerrymandering voting districts along geographic lines which tend to isolate the agricultural business sector allows it to work extremely well in a two party system of government representation in the 21st century.
3.
I wonder if gerrymandering along lines of business sectors rather than geographic districts might improve the workings of a constitutional republic which is now typified by a continuous tug of war between the political parties to garner votes from special interest group and the inability to negotiate toward a common goal.
4.
The industrial revolution, expansion of urban centers, and a highly mobile population with the advent of the automobile does not bind people together based on their lifetime pursuits and passions. The American landscape changed dramatically at the turn of the 20th century. These characteristics of population dispersal nor new modern technological inventions were not on the top of the original founders minds when the gerrymandering system was devised.
5.
The observation suggest that gerrymandering along manufacturing, service, information, and executive/education/homemaker sectors would prove more responsive to the populations involved in those endeavors which are just as vital to prosperity as agriculture in the modern age.
6.
Negotiation works very well in developing agricultural policy because of common goals.
7.
Negotiation breaks down if their is no common interest among the participants.
9.
Now of course the idea presumes that everyone has an individual and constructive purpose in life and desires to express oneself through creation. Couch potatoes and beer drinking loafers need not be represented.