The Tactics Being Deployed by the Current Republican Leadership is the Problem

Two of our smartest Political Scientists...and both try to avoid being partisan, and one is a conservative analyst from the American Enterprise Institute...recently concluded that the Republican Party leadership is "ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition....  No doubt,  Demcrats were not exactly warm and fuzzy toward George W. Bush during  his presidency. But recall that they worked hand in glove with the  Republican president on the No Child Left Behind Act, provided crucial  votes in the Senate for his tax cuts, joined with Republicans for all  the steps taken after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and supplied the key  votes for the Bush administration’s financial bailout at the height of  the economic crisis in 2008. The difference is striking."

If you only read one piece of political analysis this year, read this one (meaning the link if you click on 'concluded' above).

As a product of Catholic schools, my relationship to sisters of faith has been, well, complex.  But, when the Vatican decided to publicly humiliate 80% of Catholic sisters by calling them ‘radical feminists’ I was surprised and saddened.  First the sad part.  The bishops seem to use ‘radical feminist’ in the mean-spirited way it is tossed about in public discourse along with ‘feminazi’…a free floating signifier vaguely referring to anyone thoughtfully engaging in dialogue that challenges authority. 

Second, imagine my surprise, as a kid who was always on the other side of the law at Catholic school, to feel myself proud to say: I love my sisters.  They are courageous, humble, and Christ-like in their focus on a church family that is less about doctrine and more about a way of living, listening, and learning.  The bishops look like bullies becoming increasingly violent in their desperate efforts to defend their own power and privilege.  Though I give the bishops credit (and here they agree with sisters of faith) on their spirited challenge to both the Paul Ryan budget and to Paul Ryan's assertion that his budget reflects Catholic teachings.

American, Christian, Capitalist: President Obama

This is a bumper sticker designed to find a floor we can all agree on, encouraging us to debate the more important questions about the candidate’s comparative positions on health care or regulation, rather than wasting time on questions calculated to distract us.  At the same time, after creating this bumper sticker I have discovered that it requires some explanation.

American:  Born in Hawaii, pretty straightforward.

Christian:   Life-long practicing Christian, pretty straightforward.

Capitalist:  For me this is similarly straightforward, with some explanation

The centerpiece of his signature legislative achievement is the individual mandate, which is an idea that was developed by the Heritage Foundation as the market alternative to the single-payer plan.  See my earlier blog on local CEO’s in two of our regions largest health care providers saying they oppose efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

One central idea in his ‘all-of-the-above’ energy policy is cap ‘n trade, which is an idea initially developed by the Reagan administration as a market approach to air pollution (and successfully applied to acid rain). 

And when we look at the data on oil production, for instance, we discover that the strangulation by regulation charge—designed to suggest he is anti-capitalism—holds no water.  Domestic oil production is higher now than under the previous administration, but the data also makes it clear that this is not the right question to ask given lag times.  However, despite the complexity of the issue and the data, what is clear is that the president is not halting production or the growth of production.

“A Washington Post article last month cited an expert saying that Obama’s policies, particularly opening Alaska’s coastal waters to drilling, should keep production trending in a positive direction.”

And when we ask actual business leaders like the Business Roundtable, rather than talk radio or Fox News, about Obama administration regulatory efforts we discover that behind the sound-bites is a story that sounds more like traditional American public-privatecollaboration on regulation. 

“The Office of Management and Budget argues that the cost of new regulations in the Obama administration’s first three years was lower than the previous three years, under the George W. Bush administration. Agencies issued 886 final rules in the Obama administration’s first three years, compared with 931 in the final three Bush years….  Two weeks ago, the Business Roundtable, an organization of chief executives, issued a statement hailing the administration’s ‘effort to enact reforms that streamline the regulatory process, engage regulated parties earlier in the process and take account of the cumulative impact of regulations.’”

Does this mean there is no room for debate on the degree to which this president’s policies strengthen our economy or the degree to which this president’s decisions on how to balance regulatory and market objectives is in the public’s best interest…not at all.  That is the conversation we should be having.

The conversation we should not be having is whether or not this president is an Alien, Muslim, or Socialist.  Anyone want a bumper sticker?