Don’t Just Stand There!
Do Nothing!
The virtue of gridlock
On January 4th, Democrats took control of the House
of Representatives and tenuous control of the Senate. With the
change of power comes the possibility of something big government
types dread.
Having to beg Ted Kennedy for political favors. Heck, the last
lobbyist who asked Kennedy for a favor when he was in the majority
broke his back carrying the portable wetbar around the Kennedy
compound.
But there is something even more frightening than being Kennedy’s
liquor boy. That something is gridlock. For those of you unfamiliar
with the term, gridlock refers to when Congress can’t do
its Constitutionally-mandated job of passing bills because the
two major parties can’t agree on what needs to be done.
Why does this bother big government types? Well, when you consider
their veins run red with the bureaucratic tape of the same hue,
having Congress unable to pass more laws makes them edgy. Think
crack addicts with fashions by Brooks Brothers.
Gridlock also tends to force the two major parties to work together
to pass bills that will pass muster with their constituents. That’s
something we haven’t had a lot of in at least 12 years because
one party has held Congress and the White House. With the Democrats
taking control, some of the right’s favorite pet projects
will have to take a back seat or be altered somewhat to bring
it more to the center. In short, funding for faith-based programs
designed to teach the 14-toed sloth of the Upper Lower Middle
Amazon River basin how to speak in tongues is going to have to
wait a bit.
However, it’s not just Republicans who will have to count
their nickels and dimes. Democrats are in the same boat because
their pet projects will be held under the same scrutiny. In short,
funding for a refuge for gay 14-toed sloth of the Upper Lower
Middle Amazon River basin who were taught to speak in tongues
will also have to wait. Instead, we might have more sensible spending,
like a study on why we’re spending so much money on 14-toed
sloth in the first place.
Even though the House controls spending bills, and Democrats
hold a decent-sized majority in the House, there’s a possibility
that gridlock in the Senate could curtail any wild ideas from
the House. In the Senate, the split is 49 Democrats, 49 Republicans,
and 2 Independents who plan to caucus with the Democrats. Then,
factor into this situation the fact that South Dakota Senator
Tim Johnson (who just happens to be a Democrat) has been sidelined
by a medical condition. That reduces the vote count to 99 instead
of 100. Democrats would have to get both Independents to vote
for anything they propose, or else they don’t get what they
want, and that’s if votes are along strict party lines to
begin with. Given some of the squirrelly Democrats and Republicans
there, it’s not a lock by any means, but for the sake of
argument (and since it’s my column), let’s say it
happens.
Even if Senator Johnson comes back and votes, the ever-unpredictable
Joe Lieberman could break ranks with the Democrats, leaving a
50-50 tie. And guess who gets to break the tie. Vice President
Dick Cheney. Oops. That alone may make Senate Democrats more willing
to either work with Republicans or not work at all. You know,
just like John Kerry does.
There is one downside to gridlock. If there’s a highly
charged bill, those who want to see it defeated can easily get
it bogged down in Congress to the point that whoever proposed
the bill will withdraw it instead of watching it get voted down.
With some bills, like the PATRIOT Act or appropriations bills
for the war on terrorism, gridlock can doom even the best bills
if the political fortunes don’t shine upon it. But, like
I said earlier, it also guarantees horrible bills may go the way
of Britney Spears’s chances of being Mother of the Year,
so you have a tradeoff to consider.
As a big believer in small government, I’m enamored with
gridlock. I think it’s the greatest manmade political concept
since the Electoral College (who, once again, was snubbed by the
BCS for a bowl game). Sure, if gridlock happens, we’ll be
paying Congress for not doing their jobs, but how exactly is that
different from the way things are right now?
And that’s the Bottom Line.
|