As I write this post, there are eleventh hour negotiations going on in Washington to avert the first government shutdown since 1995. I discussed the issue last week when it was announced that Republicans and Democrats were getting closer to a budget agreement. My prediction was that there would be a compromise that would result in anywhere from $30 billion to $40 billion in cuts, with the final number being closer to $40 billion. As it turns out, the Republicans are indeed holding firm at $40 billion, while the Democrats are refusing to budge from $34.5 billion.
On the surface, they're only $5.5 billion apart. Thus it would seem that an agreement can easily be worked out before midnight to keep the government running. But I'm afraid it's not that simple.
As the old adage goes, "It's quality, not quantity, that matters." The real issue has more to do with the type of cuts that are made rather than the overall amount of dollars. The GOP wants funding slashed for Planned Parenthood, National Public Radio, and Obamacare, while the Democrats are opposed to defunding any of those entities.
Democrats are attacking the GOP for infusing politics into the budget debate, stating that hot-button social issues like abortion and the healthcare bill should be set aside as we strive to pay our bills. But in reality, it is the Democrats who are playing politics.
While the Republicans have been straightforward and honest in their proposal, the Democrats have been secretive and nebulous. The GOP has not only put forth a specific number from day one, but also outlined the areas where the cuts are to be allocated. Senate Democrats never crafted a proposal with a specific number, nor have they named specific areas where cuts should be made.
And there is a very good reason for that. The left would rather let the GOP make the first move and assail them for the content of their proposal. It's impossible for the Republicans to fire back in the same manner, because the Democrats never unveiled a plan. How can you criticize the components of a proposal when you don't even know what they are?
On the exterior, Democrats are conceding that spending cuts are necessary. But they're only doing that because they have to. The voices of American voters last November reverberated throughout the halls of Congress, and even the most liberal lawmakers know that failing to agree to spending cuts would be the equivalent of political suicide.
But they're trying to have it both ways. They're saying they want cuts, but at the same time they're not showing that they're serious about it. They continue to protect liberal causes from having their budgets slashed, and they have continuously put up obstacles during the budget debate.
Meanwhile, the president has sat idly by on the sidelines, watching it all play out. He has shown throughout his term that he has no leadership ability, and would rather delegate even the most crucial of tasks rather than step up to the plate. It wasn't until this week that he actually invited congressional leaders to the White House to broker a deal. Thank you, Mr. President. It's a little late though, don't you think?
When are the Democrats going to get it through their heads that our country is over $14 trillion in debt, and that the more debt we incur, the weaker our country becomes? They continue to mortgage our children's future without giving it a second thought, as if we had an endless supply of money to keep throwing away.
This is precisely why America needs someone like Chris Christie in the White House. The governor of New Jersey has taken a novel approach to governing: be completely honest with your constituents. He has informed us all of our dire fiscal situation, when he could have just continued spending to make everyone happy and maintain the votes needed for re-election. He could have passed the buck down the line to his successors, like all the governors that came before him. But he didn't. He has taken a stand and done what is right, regardless of whether or not it's popular.
But he won't be running for the presidency in 2012. And so we need to find someone else who can take this same approach and apply it on the federal level. Someone who is honest enough and tough enough to take a stand and stop the insanity. It's easy to sell the house and get re-elected for it. Just keep spending. Give people what they want and make them happy. Leave the mess behind for someone else to clean up.
Unless we put an end to this, our country will go to hell in a hurry. In fact, as scary as it is to admit, we're almost there. Current economic forecasts have us going broke in my lifetime if we don't change the way we govern. If you had told me when I was younger that I would live to see the day when my country went bankrupt, I never would have believed you. Not in a million years.
This is no time for politics. Programs that are unnecessary need to go. There is absolutely no need to keep funding Planned Parenthood and National Public Radio. The country will manage to survive without the National Endowment for the Arts. Many of these programs are nice to have, but how can you have them if you can't afford them?
We have 14 hours to work something out, or the government will shut down and the blame game will begin. In fact, it already has. Democrats and Republicans have taken several shots at one another through the media, and that will only get worse if a deal does not get done. The key question though will be, "Who will the people ultimately blame if the government does shut down?" Will Republicans or Democrats get most of the blame? Will people hold the President accountable or make Congress the target of their anger?
I'll say this much. I really wouldn't want to be Speaker John Boehner. Not today. He is caught between Scylla and Charybdis, as whatever choice he makes will have far-reaching implications for his standing as Speaker of the House.
If he sides with the dozens of freshman lawmakers who were bolstered by the Tea Party, then it will be impossible to cut a deal with Democrats. If he compromises and agrees to less cuts and the elimination of political riders, then he will cause a split in his own party. If he decides to go ahead and pass a budget in the House with mostly Democratic votes, then he may even be ousted as Speaker.
It wasn't too long ago that we saw him shedding tears in public for his rise to prominence. It was a beautiful story of how a young boy, one of twelve children, helped out the family business by sweeping the floors of the bar that his father owned. He worked his way up the ranks to one day get elected to Congress, and then became Speaker of the House. But now, when the smoke clears from this impending debacle, he may be shedding tears for another reason.
I'm not sure which way he'll go, but it is my hope that he holds his ground and sides with the Tea Party. Despite what some may think, I don't see how a government shutdown will hurt the Republicans. After all, they put their proposal on the table. They passed their budget in the House. It is the Democratic-led Senate and our Democratic president who have done nothing but stand around with their hands in their pockets.
The American people sent a clear message last November: "Hey Washington, CUT SPENDING!" The Republicans have tried to do just that, and they can't possibly be reviled for it. At least not by the majority of American voters. Stand your ground, Mr. Boehner, and don't give in to the scare tactics. Someone has to follow Chris Christie's example, and at this point in time, it's not going to be Harry Reid or Barack Obama. It has to be you. The question is, "Are you tough enough to take the heat?" If not, then you may have to get out of the kitchen.
No comments:
Post a Comment