Worst. Congress. Ever.

Americans have complained for years that their government is broken. This time they're right.

BY NORMAN ORNSTEIN | JULY 19, 2011

The American political process is inherently messy and disputatious. When I first came to Washington, in 1969, it was a period of divided government: A new Republican president, Richard Nixon, was faced with a Democratic Congress, marking the 15th consecutive year of their majority. Divisions were intense, particularly over the Vietnam War. But the divisions were not mainly along partisan lines. Among the strongest supporters of the Nixon approach to Vietnam were the Southern conservative Democrats (called "Boll Weevils" in honor of the insect that infects Southern cotton) who then made up about 40 percent of the majority in Congress, and also chaired most of the foreign policy and defense-related committees and subcommittees. Among the strongest opponents of Nixon's Vietnam policy were the northern liberal and moderate Republicans (called "Gypsy Moths" for the bug that hits Northeastern hardwood trees) who made up about a quarter of the minority party in Congress -- senators like Mark Hatfield of Oregon, who coauthored, with liberal Democrat George McGovern of South Dakota, the main legislative vehicle to pull the United States out of Vietnam.

Although Nixon's presidency ended prematurely in his second term under threat of bipartisan impeachment, he enjoyed a long period of productive domestic policymaking, with Democrats joining him and his party for legislative programs like revenue sharing and education reform. Sometimes Nixon was able to work with liberals, but more often he forged a centrist "conservative coalition" that included Southern Democrats joining most of his congressional Republicans.

Both Congress and the rest of the U.S. political system were already undergoing a sea change back then, with a realignment underway that turned the solid Democratic South into a more reliably Republican region and the strongly Republican New England and West Coast into Democratic strongholds. With those changes, the strong contingents of Boll Weevils and Gypsy Moths all but disappeared. Over time, the Democratic Party became more homogeneous and moved left, and the Republican Party became much more homogeneous and moved right. By the late 2000s, the center in Congress had virtually disappeared.

At the same time, two other phenomena emerged. The first was the permanent campaign, a change from an era where there were distinct seasons of campaigning and governing -- the former a vicious, zero-sum contest in which partisans were bitter enemies, the latter a conciliatory process of coalition-building among allies and adversaries alike. The second, precipitated by the stunning Gingrich-led Republican congressional victories of 1994, led to an extended era of close partisan margins, which gave rise to high-stakes legislative politics and sharply reduced incentives for lawmakers to work across party lines to solve problems.

If you doubt that politics in Congress has become more partisan, consider this: For the first time ever, in the 111th Congress that convened during the first two years of the Obama presidency, the National Journal's vote ratings showed that the most conservative Democratic senator was to the left of the most liberal Republican. There is now no overlap ideologically at all between the parties. Only nine of the remaining small number of conservative House Democrats (now called "Blue Dogs") were to the right of the most liberal House Republican. That Republican, Mike Castle of Delaware, was dumped by his party in a primary as he ran for the Senate and is now out of Congress, as are the bulk of the Blue Dogs.

Alex Wong/Getty Images

 SUBJECTS:
 

Norman Ornstein is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a weekly columnist at Roll Call.

BING520

8:32 PM ET

July 19, 2011

Congress

It is going to get worse. Americans themselves are becoming more partisan. We are more obstinate and intransigent as our ability to reason and rationalize degenerates.

As I watch Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity, I realize people don't want to listen to opposing ideas and standpoints. They shout down the guests they disagree with as if the louder and angrier they are, the righter they are. Congress members reflect that mood. When a Congressional leader believes his mission is to bring down the presidency, I can't help thinking something is very wrong, but we are getting what we create.

I, with no party loyalty or affiliation, attended a speech given by Jerry Brown, then a gubernatorial candidate of California. After the speech, iI bumped into a small group of people in the parking lot who obviously did not know what was going on. I told them Brown and his supporters, they immediately unleashed out angry diatribe and curse against Democrats.

It was not like this many years ago. What I can't understand is how we become what we are today. I often think it Is the media who have changed, but I don't really know the answer.

 

HOKEAMANIA

9:59 AM ET

July 20, 2011

Liberals are every bit as bad

From the playing od the race card by black democrats to the class warfare in use by MIcheal Moore and Unions to the anti-War and anti-capitalist rhetoric of the left wing branch to the untrammeled arrogance of leftist intellectuals..there is no group in America that surpasses liberals in terms of arrogance, intolerance, and sheer fanaticism. That is why I chuckle when I read articles like Mr. Ornstein's.

Want to know why the Tea Party acts so? Visit a college campus or attend a meeting of some left wing group. The Left has been trying to form America into their image and the Right is reacting to that attempt. What we have is two political forces battling for control of this country not only in a political sense, but culturally as well. From the traditional bastions of leftist thought in academia to cinema, music, and art..the Left has undertaken a thorough infiltration of American culture. So much so that leftist thought has become the de facto philosophy of the land. It has gotten to the point that we punish thoughts that differ from the approved way of thinking through ostracization or even jail time.

The Nazis were only able to rise because of the presence of an equally radical political element in the German body politic-- the Communists.I'll leave it to you to guess which is which.

That is what we have now. We have two groups of crazed, rigid, political groups who operate
with the same level of faith in their ideals as religious fundamentalists. The potential for civil war is as high as it has been in 150 years. People who think that such a thing is unrealistic need only to open a history book to see our tradition of internal strife.

 

DRLAKE777

11:59 AM ET

July 20, 2011

Hokeamania, that's not even

Hokeamania, that's not even close to true. While there is bad behavior on the part of liberal politicians and partisans, as the article makes clear it is worse among conservatives. That's probably because the Democratic Party and its supporters have long been a more diverse and less ideologically committed group. This is quite clear in the debt ceiling negotiations, where the Dems are willing to compromise even if it involves cuts in social spending programs while the Reps are unwilling to consider any tax increases.

 

BING520

12:04 PM ET

July 20, 2011

To: HOKEAMANIA

I am surprised you compared Today's America to post-World-War-1 Germany. We have problems that shares in a small degree some similarities with those of then-Germany. The magnitude of our problems is much less. I don't think the gulf between two competing ideologies, Republican vs. Democrat, generally speaking, is unbridgeable. What I am concerned with is the attitude with which people choose to withhold the ability to reason with those who think differently and to understand opposing standpoints.

I came for graduate study to this country in 1983. In my first year, Reagan invaded Grenada. The topic of whether it was a right thing to do was hotly debated among students. Of course there was no agreement, but all recognized and respected the merit of all the arguments presented. It was a delightful experience for me who grew up under an authoritarian regime.

Today, I found people don't debate like we used to. They get angry and refuse to listen. I noticed that trend first in TV, but I thought they were put up a show to drive up viewership. Then, gradually I realize our political elite are doing the same. Finally, it seems to me that the entire nation are talking without listening to.

 

FP_READER

1:47 PM ET

July 20, 2011

Partially Agree

I partially agree with HOKEAMANIA in that politics today is akin to religious dogma. The left was worse prior to the 1980's with the use of race as the canon of political dialog. Since Reagan and his introduction of the radical right, both sides are now infected.

Nothing will get better until both sides decide that, instead of being liberal or conservative, they are Americans instead.

The attitudes of the constituents are the problem.

 

RETIREDMD

8:30 AM ET

July 22, 2011

To Hokemoron

Your comments typify the arrogance, ignorance, hypocrisy and mendacity infecting today's Republican Party and the abject "Tea Party" morons who clearly put the welfare of the wealthy few ahead of the needs of the less fortunate majority.
The inequality created by the disaster that was GW Bush and his Republican minions in Congress has grown to epic porportions. At present, the 400 richest Americans together hold more wealth than the 150 MILLION least fortunate. This is abominable-and growing worse.
That the Republicans in the House would take this country to the brink of default with its attendant world-wide calamatous effects speaks volumes about their disloyalty and utter lack of patriotism and responsibility.
In 1964, Barry Goldwater expressed great fear and concern that the zealous ideology of future generations of religious right-wing conservatives would make his own conservativism seem quite moderate. Quite an understatement.

 

TOMV

10:33 AM ET

July 22, 2011

Money is the issue.

I disagree with several previous replies, especially the one by BING520. After all, Keith Obermann was once a liberal/left TV host, until he got so bad he got kicked off the air. Funny that of the conservative TV hosts BING520 mentions, only one has left his TV spot, and that was done voluntarily.

And please, correct me if I'm wrong, but I've never seen a conservative activist scream at a public event, but I have seen many liberals/left do so. In fact, the current craze of use shaving cream pies on people was started by left wing activists. And there have been dozens of reports of left wing activists extorting banks etc, something I don't see conservative activists doing. "You will provide loans to people who can't qualify, or do you want protesters outside your door tomorrow." This has happened and is documented.

Getting to the main reason for the disfunction of Congress, its easy. No money. One of the problems with democratic style governments is the little issue of getting people to vote for you. History (going back to Greece/Rome) shows that politicians/leaders know the way to stay elected/stay in power. Provide goodies. "A chicken in every pot!" is now "Any government program to get me elected!" But now we can't afford every program, at a time when you have the highest % of Americans on "the dole". Their hands out, waiting for that Treasury check. And we, the American public, have trained our political lapdogs in Congress well. Keep those bennies coming, and we will re-elect you. But now the money isn't there but we have yanked the leashes on our lapdogs, reminding them that failure is not an option. So it is no surprise that they are scrambling. We as Americans have spoken. Our hand is out, and we expect something to be placed in it. That piece of paper with the Treasury seal and the $ figures.

 

VICTORIO

10:36 PM ET

July 22, 2011

democrats and liberals

I am Black Cherokee and truthfully, I feel more comfortable as the only brown face in a liberal democrat crowd(peace rallies) than I would at the NRA convention. I love weapons and am an avid shooter, and occaisonal hunter, but five'll get you ten, that at the NRA convention some right wing imbecile will condescend to me, patronize me, or just downright show me his hindquarters and tell me to go back to Africa. I love Lynrd Sknyrd, but I will not go to see them in concert. Point I am trying to make is that until Republicans/conservatives don't learn how to treat people like me as human beings then we will never support them.

 

MIKE570

2:22 AM ET

July 23, 2011

Perfect Example

Hokeamania's response is a perfect example of what the author is talking about. Instead of realizing that most liberals and conservatives just want to have a family, a career, and decent retirement, he immediately begins painting liberals as minority crybabies (because racism doesn't exist in America anymore, right?) to being communists. I don't necessarily blame him for this. I blame Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, and Michael Savage. These guys have been telling conservatives for years that the sky is falling and that liberals are going to end America as we know it. Michael Moore has been on the other side of it but he's just as bad. Because of him, alot of liberals believe that Bush was friends with Osama Bin Laden.

I was listening to Michael Savage's radio show one night and I've never heard a more xenophobic, racist and hateful man in my life. Now he tries to hide the racism a little but it's clearly there if you just listen to his wording. He was complaining about how hispanics and Asians are set to overtake the white and black populations. He gave a number of theories as to why this has happened but it all came down to blaming liberals. I was just amazed by the sheer insanity of his arguments. Apparently he believes that waiting until you're ready to have a child is a bad thing. He also kept going on about the "Liberal Media Sewer Pipe", which sounds alot like what Hokeamania was talking about.

Hokeamania, I'm going to try speaking directly to you. Liberals are not out to get you. We're not out to destroy the country and have orgies on every street corner. We just have a difference of opinion on how the country should be run. I believe the rich have a responsibility to the country from which they attained their wealth. You likely believe that taxes are bad and that they discourage job growth. But it's simply not supported by fact. Taxes are the lowest they have been for the rich in 60 years. But yet we're still losing jobs and I believe that is simply due to excessive corporate greed. Lower taxes further for the rich will create jobs, though. In China, not America.

Germany has some of the highest taxes in Europe, yet its economy has largely weathered the economic catastrophe. The main reason for that was because they used their tax revenue properly. They invested it in their people and their infrastructure. They protected their domestic manufacturing. That's why they have a better trained workforce than we do and that's why they are in a better situation than us.

 

KUHVKHB

9:34 PM ET

July 23, 2011

Re: TOMV post

Thank you so much for the invitation to correct you if you were wrong.

I don't even have to think too hard to remember the health-care town hall meetings where conservative activists were out of hand -- attempting to shout down Congressmen, disruptive behavior, etc.

What selective memory we have. It isn't one side or the other, its both. And both should get past the techniques of arguing and get to the substance of the issue.

We can only hope. And how much better we could be.

 

ANTILIBERAL

5:32 AM ET

July 24, 2011

congress

hey ornstein you just described the senate and that thing you call the president
take your liberal head out of your a--h--e and open your eyes.

 

REALLYREALLY

8:11 AM ET

July 24, 2011

RetiredMD

Perhaps we could Tax the excessive, repetitive use of negative adjectives used to reference each political party in all Blogs & comments. We would have a budget surplus in no time.

P.S. The incorrect and subjective use of 'mendacity' should qualify for a higher tax bracket. Let's do it for the children...

 

BETHBRONSIL

6:08 AM ET

July 25, 2011

CONGRESS DOES NOT WORK FOR THE PEOPLE

The lack of respect for the President is a harmful picture for our children. The Republicans are more interested in holding onto their position than in helping to govern this nation.

Republican have signed pledges that there will be no tax increases. Do they realize that they are signing a pledge to ignore their own conscience, their constituents, and the ability to listen to other leaders? This pledge holds them back from doing what is good for America.

Congress is not doing the job we pay them to do.

This is the worst congess ever. The common people of America are suffering as it watches
leaders do nothing for jobs, the environment, the housing crisis, health care, trade agreements, etc.

We are in trouble and I blame a group of leaders who can not find room to compromise and come to some decisions about moving this great nation forward.

 

RHODESMANTWO

6:17 PM ET

July 29, 2011

 

BIGFBEAR

10:49 PM ET

July 29, 2011

To the Members of Congress: If You're In You're Out

"If you're in, you're out" should be the rallying cry of all voters come the 2012 elections regardless of party. These so-called negotiations on the debt-limit have become a public relations farce. We'll police up those not running in 2012 in later-year elections. In any event, we will remember

 

ISABELDELOSRIOS

5:01 AM ET

August 5, 2011

Road to Tyranny...

That's whats going on here. The same scumbag aristocratic families that have caused nothing but death and slavery for 100's of years are taking us into tyranny once again. Freedom is a new idea, one that is fading rapidly. Research history.

- Isabel De Los Rios

 

ZARATHUSTRA7

10:21 PM ET

August 7, 2011

Debt & Money

You're right, I definitely agree with you.

But the problem is not the debt, it is the whole money-system. Big boy's controll us, and they would do anything, to protect their status.

They went to Irak to get some oil not only for money, but to keep their system running. How are people supposed to work, when they don't have fuel to tank their cars ? : ) We will see what will come, for me there's nothing I can do. GrauWolf

Only thing we know is, war hasn't stopped yet. It's just not infront of our doors, the question is: How long will it take? Sauvignon Blanc

best regards,
Daniel F.

 

KYLE STREESEN

7:44 PM ET

August 15, 2011

worst

I do not really think this Congress the worst, but certainly if you talk about paralegal certification and look at the articles written by bylandorsea themselves, you can see the drastic decrease in votes. I'm talking about legal assistants simply because it's the domain that I know, but that too we could also talk about lawyers, doctors or nurses - it does not matter.

 

GIGA34

1:12 PM ET

August 19, 2011

Economic situation is getting

Economic situation is getting worst and worst but still government has no plan, that bailout plan proved to be a failed attempt to support economy. Government is still busy in opening war horizons in different areas where we are not party in either case. mypadmedia Thanks

 

VOTEORDIE2000

11:09 PM ET

July 19, 2011

Two Problems

1) Typing error on last line of the fifth to last paragraph (top paragraph on page five).

2) My understanding is that the single biggest reason for the polarization of the parties over the past decades has been the primary elections. It used to be that party bosses would pick centrist candidates that would be the best bet to win a general election. The people who come out to primaries are on average more left-leaning in the Dem primaries and right-leaning in the GOP primaries than the average Democrat or Republican, leading to more conservative Republicans and more liberal Democrats facing off against each other in general elections.

Other than that, great article.

 

JBIRDMENJ

6:56 PM ET

July 20, 2011

Primary Elections and Taxes

I agree with VOTEORDIE2000 that one of the biggest structural issues that prevents good candidates from emerging is the primary system, with its emphasis on appealing to the party members instead of the electorate in general. However, I also think that people don't want to pay more taxes. I have read that historically in the post WW2 period, the average American taxpayer pays about 18% of their income as federal taxes; to pay for the deficit and Obamacare, without major program cuts, it would have to go up to 24%, and it wouldn't be 24% across the board; families who make a combined income of $250,000 or more per year would pay something like 40% I know that in the NYC suburbs, that is not "rich" but rather middle class; most who make this much put in long hours to do so.

When 52% percent of voters are able to pass legislation that they want to be paid for by the 48% of voters who voted for the other candidate, there is going to be anger.

 

JWCOGBURN

8:36 AM ET

July 20, 2011

Mr. Ornstein, I agree with

Mr. Ornstein,

I agree with your conclusion: Congress, now, more than ever seems to be failing us. And from your article, you seem to identify pure partisanship as the budding issue that continues to plague Congress, making it less and less effective.

However, I would ask - is there more than one side to this story? I share no strong affiliation with either party - I share an affiliation to a government that works and brings about the wants of its people. Yet, from my reading of your article, you do seem to attribute much of the building partisanship to specific examples and actions undertaken by a single party. If this is strictly the case, please say so. On the other hand, I have a gut feeling that such dual partisanship can only be reached if both parties continue to stake out further divided positions. If this is the case, we as your readers should hear about it. Otherwise, I fear your article may run the risk of perpetuating feelings of bitterness that ultimately lead to actions in defense of a party, rather than in defense of a system. Your thoughts on this would be much appreciated.

Additionally, I would like to observe that it seems we do not have a great way to have a national discourse in the United States capable of both informing the populace of current issues and providing politicians with our views of what ought to happen. In turn, much of our discourse seems to be carried by those with more extreme positions, who act out of ideologies to defend their more separated views. Part of this, I think, could be related to the primaries eliminating a lot of influence of centrists - and, this is a shame. However, I wonder if with the rise in technological inter-connectivity and broad, full media coverage if there is not a better way to connect the U.S. so that intelligent and informative conversations can be had. Do you have any thoughts on how we could start or restart such a dialogue and better inform our populace?

Thanks,

Rooster

 

ILVERITAS

9:43 AM ET

July 20, 2011

Agreed

Too true. I lament the loss of the cordial and logical argument. Adults today argue much like children, a back and forth of "I'm not listening!" and "I know you are but what am I?". There is no forum for public political discourse which incorporates all points of view and all possible avenues towards the best solution.

I come from the 'apathetic' generation that refuses to take part in the tragedy that is our national government. When in fact that apathy stems from a feeling of exasperation and resignation. There is no way that I as a private citizen can influence my government. And the groups and organizations that claim to represent those interests often don't reflect my values at all.

So I sit back and marvel at their completely inability and unwillingness to govern, hoping that Congress' failings don't screw me over too badly. I'm waiting for the day when my 'apathetic' generation comes to power and gets something done. It's called comprimise; children can do it, the people that run our nation should be able to too.

 

THERSITES

9:06 AM ET

July 20, 2011

Congress

"Suppose you were an idiot! Suppose you were a member of Congress! But I repeat myself." (Mark Twain)

 

ANALYTIC OBSERVER

11:34 AM ET

July 20, 2011

Congress and GOP Victories in 2010

The Republican sweep in 2010 was NOT a result of Republican "obstructionism" or even the Tea Party per se. It was an understandable reaction to the dramatic lurch to the left by President Obama, the result of an over-reading of his "mandate" when in fact he only got 52.5% of the vote in an election in which he was virtually unopposed (McCain being a horrible candidate). A majority of Americans reacted to the dramatic increase in Federal spending, a very poorly designed stimulus which featured spending on transfer payments instead of investments in infrastructure (which would have had a far more effective job-creating effect), the enactment of a health care law which 60% of Americans continue to believe should be repealed, and a highly partisan "reform" of financial regulation. All of the Obama 2009-2010 initiatives were enacted in a highly partisan fashion, without even the slightest consultation with Republicans. He should learn from Governors of both parties, such as Andrew Cuomo in NY and Chris Christie in NJ, that it is better to get some bipartisan support for major changes in law -- that way, they tend to last longer and be more widely accepted.

 

DRLAKE777

12:04 PM ET

July 20, 2011

Dramatic lurch to the left?

Dramatic lurch to the left? By promoting a health care reform bill that would have been considered quite conservative, before the GOP lost its mind? By escalating our military involvement in Afghanistan? By promoting financial reform that Wall Street got the chance to weaken? By largely caving in on the revenue vs. spending cuts debate? By passing a stimulus that was too small and included many pointless tax cuts because conservatives were throwing fits about being governed by a black president? Obama has governed from the center, and it is only your ideological blinders that prevent you from seeing this.

 

XTIANGODLOKI

12:14 PM ET

July 20, 2011

Hmm no

If you look at the breakdowns of voter demographics, the many of the people who voted for Obama didn't care to come and vote in 2010. Some of this has to do with the fact that Obama simply didn't go far to the left enough. Obama, though definitely pushes for liberal policies is also a lot more open to compromises.

Of course, the fact that the economy was still in the dumps didn't help Obama at all.

 

LARRY219

10:10 AM ET

July 23, 2011

Now This Ought to Ruffle Some Feathers!

@ANALYTIC OBSERVER, I couldn't agree with you More! Of course, the lefties will muddle along spouting their rhetoric wearing their blinders and remain oblivious of the facts. Too bad, they can't tolerate a little reality. No Business - No Job - Tax the Rich - Share the Wealth it's not hard to figure out. Poor People would like to become Rich - - - Rich people DECIDE to be Rich and do whats necessary to make it Happen. It's equal opportunity no matter what the left says...there are just toooo many examples of people becoming RICH in this Country regardless of race, creed or color. It is what it is and that's what it will (should) always be!

The Pelosi Congress was a disaster to the country and a continued Obama admin will be devastating! (It raising it's ugly Socialist head already!) And Poor OLD Harry Reid (I can call him old) needs to be put out to pasture, maybe he and Obama can kick back and puff on an eSmoke or something else they may be smoking!

[url]http://esmokesaloon.com/esmoke-review]eSmokeSaloon[/url]

 

LARRY219

10:12 AM ET

July 23, 2011

Now This Ought to Ruffle Some Feathers!

@ANALYTIC OBSERVER, I couldn't agree with you More! Of course, the lefties will muddle along spouting their rhetoric wearing their blinders and remain oblivious of the facts. Too bad, they can't tolerate a little reality. No Business - No Job - Tax the Rich - Share the Wealth it's not hard to figure out. Poor People would like to become Rich - - - Rich people DECIDE to be Rich and do whats necessary to make it Happen. It's equal opportunity no matter what the left says...there are just toooo many examples of people becoming RICH in this Country regardless of race, creed or color. It is what it is and that's what it will (should) always be!

The Pelosi Congress was a disaster to the country and a continued Obama admin will be devastating! (It raising it's ugly Socialist head already!) And Poor OLD Harry Reid (I can call him old) needs to be put out to pasture, maybe he and Obama can kick back and puff on an eSmoke or something else they may be smoking!

http://esmokesaloon.com/esmoke-review

 

JM REINOSO

10:27 PM ET

July 31, 2011

Oh man, Larry.

Rich people decide to be rich? That’s how it happens? Maybe true in a vacuum, where every one of us has the same intellectual capacity and we all began life at the same starting line… Sadly, that’s not the case. And any study of sociology (i.e. awareness of place-based resources) would be a good place to substantiate that reality. Reality suggests to me that people who have the means (i.e. education, beginning in early childhood) to become rich can choose to pursue wealth…and not all of us do. I can say that as a former Wall Street professional. Too commonly, wealth is achieved blindly through a focus on capital gains—realized now primarily in equities markets (RIP home equity value). The minority of Americans with a grounding in financial literacy can quickly point to the near-sighted and short term “mandate” for profit-maximization of the vast majority of publicly traded multinational corporations (what’s in the “best interest” of their shareholders…yeah, right) for our inability to produce or manufacture real value and control the runaway income gap that is destroying our neighbors and necessitates social programs. Coupled with the strain on our natural resource endowment—globally—our trajectory suggests we would be wise to abandon the consumerist culture pandered by the media and special interest lobbies (and, the soon-to-be crowned, most flagrantly culpable terrorist of our time, Mr. Murdoch). Looked at the commodities markets recently? It’s rather clear to me that becoming rich is an assumed desired endgame. Might I suggest you reconsider that we can all live happy, productive and enriching lives without focusing on wealth-maximization? If we can strive for (and, I pray, reach) that enlightenment, we can begin to grasp why our political system is failing.

 

MARTY24

2:25 PM ET

July 20, 2011

Where the problem comes from

We have been heading toward this since that day in Dallas in 1963. Before rejecting this claim out-of-hand, hear me out.

1963 is now a long time ago, so the issue isn't discussed much anymore, but the debate about Vietnam, and the rancor it roused, would not have been possible without the wingnuts who claimed that Johnson had had Kennedy assassinated so the US could remain in that war. There has never been any evidence produced for this, but at the time people, especially on the Left, believed it. The Kennedy assassination thus planted the seeds of doubt about the legitimacy of government and whether the people who lead us could be trusted. It would help if the secret data on the assassination were made public today.

The next step was Watergate and the insistence that this represented what happens when the Right controls government. No, it was what happened when we had a paranoid president who didn't trust the media. Media more committed to presenting each side fairly would help, but we don't have that.

Step three came with the election 2000 debacle and the Left's insistence that George Bush had not been elected legitimately. They insisted their man had won, and thus rejected anything Bush proposed. Because this was an electoral issue, it cemented the ideological and partisan nature of governance that Ornstein laments.

Finally, we come to the 2008 campaign in which Barack Obama decided that the people didn't need to know what he stood for -- a campaign representative admitted as much on NPR. This tactic, which may have been electorially advantageous, carries with it an unforgiving governance problem: it cannot provide a mandate for anything. That many people still cannot figure out what Obama stands for, after 30 months in the White House, is part of the problem. That Obama also chose to leave open critical questions about his identity has exacerbated the problem. We were asked, almost literally, to buy a pig in a poke.

Republicans responded to Obama's election not by obstructing policies on which Obama had run but by opposing notions he announced after the election. For example, the health care bill hadn't even been written when Obama took to the road to campaign for it, denouncing Republican claims about what the bill contained as not true, without admitting that they weren't true because there was no bill.

The Left created the problem of trust in government, and now objects that Republicans didn't stand and salute when Obama demanded that they trust him. The problem of trust in Barack Obama is very serious since to this day we don't know what he would do with a second term. He must either come clean about everything or stand down from seeking re-election. That he has denounced the role of money in campaigns, while declaring his candidacy early so he can collect an estimated billion plus dollars for his next campaign, more than campaigns as a whole cost only a decade or so ago, speaks to his credibility. Meanwhile, the media refuse to address this very real issue.

People who wish to restore faith in the US government need to call on Obama to withdraw from the 2012 campaign. He can do his greatest service to this country by bowing out.

 

BING520

3:28 PM ET

July 20, 2011

The problem

Marty seems to suggest that Obama is the sole source of all our problem in the government and the Democrats alone are responsible for all the evils in government. There is no exaggeration to say Marty's wring is biased and one-sided. Unfortunately I met many counterparts of Marty in the Democrat camp.

 

JOHNQPUBLICAN

3:39 AM ET

July 26, 2011

Interesting analysis

I'm not going to argue that Watergate, particularly, massively enhanced polarisation in the US. You are most certainly right that it was the actions of Nixon that first introduced really wide-spread suspicion of authority in the USA, and which allowed for the scrutiny which drove the internet generation to reject the comfortable assumption that the rich are on our side.

But I'm slightly surprised that you have missed in this analysis every single instance where polarisation was a deliberate goal of policy. Start from GHWBush and the cabal he brought into policits. Then read what that cabal wrote on at the Project for the New American Century.

Gingrich, Rove, and Cheney were the primary architects of an electoral strategy through the 90s which said; we have the Bible Belt. If we do enough things that make the extreme right angry, we win elections. So; lets hammer every partisan button we can, lets do away with compromise, lets start a media circus every time we can piss people off. That wins elections. And it did...

The Lewinsky scandal was compared to Watergate. The one was a private scandal about a man's dick and his infidelity. The other was a systematic case of political espionage, violence and deliberate vandalism. And yet, the Starr inquistion generated so much rage that the Republicans .... just scraped a judicial victory in 2000.

Then look at the behaviour in office of Bush Junior. Look at this graph. You can legitimately, as you do, point to times when events made liberals get more and more cynical about Republicans. You can't point to any periods of 20 years where the stated and public policy of the DNC was to polarise political opinion and generate as much rage and emotional politics as possible. Because for the Democrats, that has always been a losing strategy, or at least it has since the end of Vietnam. Democrats win when people are thinking collectively, hoping together. Republicans when off of Us and Them.

The current level of violent divisiveness in US popular politics evolved, in part, due to liberal distrust of the right. But it has been actively promoted, accelerated and developed as a matter of persistent policy, by the RNC, ever since 1992.

 

AND REW

6:33 PM ET

July 20, 2011

RE

I think another important factor has been the fact that the members of the two parties literally don't KNOW each other. They no longer spend time DC and the brief time they are there, they spend it with the members of their own party and at fund-raising.

 

RATIONALREVO

10:45 AM ET

July 21, 2011

Our government filled with anti-government people

One of the problems is that our government has become filled with people who don't want to fix government, in their view it can't be fixed, government, as a fundamental concept, to thee people is just plain bad, and so their objective is not to fix or make it better under any definition of the term, but simply to destroy it, and they are succeeding.

It's one thing to be in favor of "small government" and to take and that and to try and make government lighter and leaner and more efficient, and even to work to trim back programs, etc., but that's not even what these folks are doing, they aren't trying to make a more efficient machine, they are just throwing wrenches and tar and mud into the gears. They are just doing everything they can to make the system totally breakdown, and its working.

 

KATERINA PEKOVA

1:31 PM ET

July 21, 2011

Well written article!

Too bad good candidates have a hard time succeding, since the appeal is on the party members instead of the electorate. The US congress is indeed a disgrace. The government is broken and no tactics can get it back on track. At least Obama should have the decency to withdraw from the 2012 campaign...

 

GORDONO

4:35 PM ET

July 21, 2011

Good article...

But a plurality of the comments reflect a massive cognitive dissonance and a less than passing acquaintance with 20th century US and World history.

And that is why America is in the shape it is and has the Congress it has. Epic, willful and assiduously cultivated ignorance of one's own history and the world beyond the national boundary by a self-indulgent, self-referential populace, most of whom are not worthy of the title 'citizen'.

I write as a former, old time Conservative who breathed the movement's policies and philosophies via the National Review from the mid 60s through the mid 70s, canvassed for James Buckley's successful Senate campaign in NY and was a founder member of a Young Americans for Freedom chapter in college.

Why did I leave? Because life took me to Europe for 2 decades where I saw policies work that my ideology told me could not ever work and I saw Conservative parties govern whose policies were in line with or slightly to the left of those of US Democrats at the time.

To call today's Democrats Leftists when in a European context they would fit in happily with the German CDU beggars belief. Both Obama and Clinton have governed to the right of Nixon and with some of his most recent positions, Obama has moved to the right of Eisenhower.

Except for the paucity of plantations, the United States is now a banana republic governed by an plutocratic oligarchy grown skilled in domestic divide, bribe and conquer. Give global warming another 50-100 years and we'll be growing our own bananas.

And still be swinging in the trees too...

 

GLOBALFORCES

8:39 PM ET

July 21, 2011

Everything is driven by imperative to get re-elected

I have to say, I don't think Congress is necessarily failing America. America might be failing Congress.

Let me explain: The current set up of both houses makes it imperative to get re-elected. it means continuing to serve on important committees that mean more power for you, it means more pork more ceiling fans for your district, it means more favors and kick-backs to you (let's not kid ourselves, this is how it works...) so a Congressman's main concern is getting re-elected, not necessarily acting in their constituency's best interests.

The founders, from what I've read, considered it important that about 3/4 of congress turn over each election. Right now it isn't even 1/4 because of the huge advantage incumbents have during elections.

So if Americans decide that they are fed up with the way things are working, just vote against every incumbent, put a fresh new set of faces in there, shake things up. Sure they will get bought just like every other politician, but it gets to be more and more expensive to have to keep buying the new guys every four years, so eventually it might make it a bit more functional.Final point I would make would be the time frame of this "wrong" track assertion. I don't see a complete reversal in Congress' actions over the last two years with the two that preceded it. I think that a time frame is going to be needed in order to assess Congress' successes or failures. You dont have to be a seoexpert. I don't think that the question is out of order, as the upcoming midterm elections are being seen as a referendum on Congress, in general. Yet, if we are going to engage in a serious examination of the Legislative Branch, more clarification and definition will be needed or it will devolve into a series of monologues spouting off political cliches that have been generated through partisanship and not a real and substantive examination of issues.

 

STRAIGHT-SHOOTER

6:51 PM ET

July 23, 2011

RE: Good Article

Gordono - Simply superb observations.
Almost parallel political experiences and arrival at the same conclusions lead me to wish you were not so utterly correct and to hanker for the times when Republican and conservative meant upstanding, principled and patriotic.
I've watched in recent years as some of the best have abandoned the GOP and contemporary conservatism to the fanatics, the destructive and the essentially anti-American. Its sad beyond words.
Is becoming an Independent in this furnace of public ignorance and blatant oligarchic control only a way station to eventual evolution into a Revolutionary? It has happened in the past in mankind's political history. Is it America's turn?

 

DSR4468

7:18 PM ET

July 23, 2011

Gordono, Thank you so much

Gordono, Thank you so much for your comment. You said so eloquently what I believe but often don't have words for. Reading our history it is clear that we have moved farther and farther right so that now Obama is considered a liberal. I always know that people who believe this do not know our political history and do not understand what is going on today. As you have noted, we are now governed by the shadow plutocratic oligarchy who write our legislation, ensure that they put into office power hungry and not so bright people and manipulate them to do as they are told. They are succeeding as evidenced by the number of people who continue to vote against their own self interest ensuring that the rich get richer and the poor, well you know the rest.

 

MONTEZOOMA_9

2:39 PM ET

July 29, 2011

Thank you

Thank you Thank you Thank you. Epic, willful and assiduously cultivated ignorance of one's own history and the world beyond the national boundary by a self-indulgent, self-referential populace, most of whom are not worthy of the title 'citizen'.

I think this is the key to most of the problem.

 

ALAN SMITHEE

6:44 PM ET

July 21, 2011

No it isn't

The worst congress ever was the congress og 1876. That was the year "reconstruction" ened and black americans in the south were left to languish under the tyrranical heel of a terrorist regime for nearly a hundred years. What has this congress done that is even close?
Point of note: After the election the last armed black regiments (who incidentally were the only thing keeping terrorists from taking over)left the south and we all left our fellow citizens tio the "mercy" of th=r klsn.

 

JJJONAS

7:12 AM ET

July 22, 2011

I don't think that the

I don't think that the question is out of order, as the upcoming midterm elections are being seen as a referendum on Congress, in general. Yet, if we are going to engage in a serious examination of the Legislative Branch, more Seo paslaugos

 

JJJONAS

7:13 AM ET

July 22, 2011

The founders, from what I've

The founders, from what I've read, considered it important that about 3/4 of congress turn over each election. Right now it isn't even 1/4 because of the huge advantage incumbents have during elections. Seo paslaugos You dont have to be a seoexpert. I don't think that the question is out of order, as the upcoming midterm elections are being seen as a referendum on Congress, in general. Yet, if we are going to engage in a serious examination of the Legislative Branch

 

3GOLDBARS

10:03 AM ET

July 22, 2011

Worst Congress Ever?

I think it's bad, but we've had worse. LIke just before, during, and after the "Civil War"... But I digress...this article is simply an attack on the Republican party and reeks of liberal partisanship. Though the author does get some points right, when the article is so blatantly biased, it rapidly becomes a complete waste of time, and just as meritorious as anything Fox News puts out...

 

PFIDELIA

2:53 PM ET

July 22, 2011

Climbing up the right wing

3GoldBars,

You do realize who Norman Ornstein is, don't you?

He has been a stalwart of the American Enterprse Institute (scarcely a hotbed of leftist sentiment!!) since 1978. A liberal he is not.

The Republican Party has become a caricature of its former self, one where the only two wings of the party are the right wing and the "righter wing".

If Ronald Reagan were to appear today espousing the same philosophy and governing in exactly the same way he did during his actual tenure, he would be called a RINO; Gerald Ford and Richard Nixon would probably be drummed out of the party altogether.

The very fact that the same Michelle Bachman who wasn't given any important assignments by her own party in the last decade is now a serious candidate for the Republican nomination says it all.

 

CASSANDRINA

4:57 PM ET

July 22, 2011

Bias? What Bias?

So now we have it.
The dysfunction of Congress is all the Republican Party's fault.
Nothing like a properly balanced article to make people change their minds.

 

CHUCK CRANE

3:29 PM ET

July 24, 2011

You got that right

Ornstein is apparently dumb enough to think that passing legislation is an end in itself. With his demented standard, anyone who opposes stupid legislation is an evil obstructionist.

 

ELLERVEIRA

9:43 PM ET

July 22, 2011

declining power

My own sense, I have no proof of course, is that this is related to the decline in the US's prospects and the uneasy sense in the nation that it has lost its purpose in the world. In short, that this government infighting (clownish in many respects and unintelligent) is an effect of this decline. If the US had the feeling that it had an important role to play in the world I suspect Washington would function much better. But purposeless and aimless, the people who run the nation turn on each other and spend time in trying to gain some small temporary advantage. Of course the economic crisis, the lack of growth in wages, and growing lumpenproletariat contributes to all this. But the US has suffered a permanent blow to its ego and I doubt it will ever fully recover.

 

BRAUERR31

1:25 PM ET

July 23, 2011

Congress Is Worthless

Not only is there numerous amounts of red tape and bureaucracy in our government there is downright idiocy. We can't blame it on the democrats or the republicans. Everyone is at fault. I realize that this may be a bit idealistic, but, progress will not be made until both sides can come to mutual terms on the countries most important issues. That being said, the future isn't looking very bright for the United States, but let's hope that our lawmakers will come to their senses soon.

Robert (aka the mac flight simulator guy)

 

DRYWALLROB

10:30 PM ET

August 1, 2011

Congress Is Completely Worthless

Brauerr31, I agree with you 100%. As you can see, they waited until the 11th hour to pass the "debt deal", which is not good for America. Congress, and all of our politicians let this problem fester like a boil, for years. Its crazy to think that this problem recently popped up like a bad zit. It has been here for several years, and has been ignored. What makes it worse, is that neither side will work together. They both view it as political suicide to come out for/against debt ceiling. For a minute I expected them to ignore each other, and make Obama invoke his constitutional rights as President and push something thru.

We all need to take action the next election and clean house. It is time for a new government! We need officials that are going to look out for the little guy. Small business needs help! With the economy in the state it is, it is going to make my drywall company, and other construction companies go out of biz! Enough is enough!

I want some real change.

Obama, are you listening?

 

KANE

8:48 PM ET

July 23, 2011

Remember When

"This Democratic Congress is on a path to become one of the most productive since the Great Society 89th Congress in 1965-66, and Obama already has the most legislative success of any modern president -- and that includes Ronald Reagan and Lyndon Johnson. The deep dysfunction of our politics may have produced public disdain, but it has also delivered record accomplishment."

-Norm Ornstein, January 2010

What a world of difference one mid-term election can have.

 

TEA_JESUS

2:34 AM ET

July 24, 2011

Murdoch has won

Rupert Murdoch has America just where he wants it.

 

VACCA STULTA

5:38 AM ET

July 24, 2011

Republicans will pay at the polls

Most Americans know who is most responsible for the mess created in the Bush and Boehner years.

The Republican Party is intellectually barren and relying on the support of millionaires, billionaires, corporations and blue collar, conservative extremists. They have nothing to offer beyond their constant bleating about liberals, who happen to be everyone who disagrees with them..

The American majority will not allow Republicans to do to the country what they have done to their own party.

 

DOBERMANMACLEOD

5:47 AM ET

July 24, 2011

I beg to differ

I beg to differ with my friend who says: "The American majority will not allow Republicans to do to the country what they have done to their own party."

There is abundant evidence that the "majority" (whatever that means) is consistently allowing the Republicans to do to the country what they have done to their own party. Hope is not a policy.

Since neither a loyal opposition, nor an informed electorate, will materialize anytime soon (and probably never), I don't see this trend discontinuing. Too bad, so sad. The solution is to believe the truth (something that most people in this country wouldn't recognize if it hit them in the face).

 

DOBERMANMACLEOD

5:41 AM ET

July 24, 2011

It is worse than you think

While I am a firm believer of democracy, such a "condition" needs two things to function: a "loyal opposition," and an informed electorate. I think it is obvious that we now have neither.

The reason this is more important than you might at first glance think is because most people have the "normalcy bias." In other words, it is a safe bet that tomorrow will be like today. On the other hand, it ought to be obvious that tomorrow is not always going to be like today.

Meanwhile, technology is proceeding more and more rapidly. It is a mater of survival (not only for our nation, but for the human species) that we be able to adjust course depending upon the emerging technology, but we apparently have lost that ability due to sophomoric political calculation.

As an example: there is a new clean energy technology emerging that is 1/5th the cost of any conventional. LENR using nickel. Google the Rossi E-Cat if you don't believe me. Unfortunately, Congress is unable to come to grips with this (like they failed to come to grips with advances in genomics - but that is another story).

In other words, while Congress and the President ought to be preparing our nation to adopt rapidly this new energy technology, they are simply not up to the task. Ironically, one party is simply focused on no new taxes, when that strategy makes us all poorer when it leaves us unable to adapt to a new tomorrow. You simply don't yet understand how dangerous a dysfunctional Congress is I would have to state that the US is not a superpower anymore when it's government is unable to come to grips with the most elementary change.

 

EFPEFP

5:55 AM ET

July 24, 2011

Congress

The United States..... a nation in decline.
Led by self serving intellectual bureaucrats, barren of common sense there is little hope for this nation.

 

ZYGOR Z

4:57 PM ET

August 16, 2011

barren of common sense?

It does seem that way, but your statement is far from the truth. The government seems extremely stupid with all the mistakes they make, but the fact is, there not working for the people.

There working for the criminal network of Zionist's that are using the US to advance there dream of a world government. Which will bring nothing less than total tyranny.

- Zygor

 

IND.THINKER

6:12 AM ET

July 24, 2011

Its the voters stupid

The fact is we have a partisan congress because not enough Americans bother to vote. People who are inflamed by what they hear on talk radio and TV, go to the primaries and vote for agenda driven candidates. In the general elections most people who do turn out vote their party. I don't think the Democratic congress has gotten more liberal. Its basically the same smucks that have always been there, but the Republican House has become filled with strange characters who push talk radio beliefs such as 95% Planned Parenthood is abortion, Obama is not an American citizen, evolution is a lie, The US government is more evil then big business.
The people who vote for these whacky politicians are often on SS and Medicare and don't know want to pay more taxes even though they don't care if they drain the coffers dry, as long as it benefits them.

 

SCOTT IN TX

11:10 AM ET

July 24, 2011

Agree with the the dis-function

If anything this gridlock between the Republican who I do blame for this gridlock and the Democrats who are not coming to the table with enough voice to be heard, Is showing America that Term Limits on Washington is a very much needed result, As all the House and Senate is looking at is re-election, not what is good for the Country as a whole. If they don't reach a agreement here is what i would do all Senate and House member have all pay suspended, Medical benefits ended, retirement ended, All staff they have laid-off, All the Perks ended. Air Conditioning shut off, cleaning services ended, Government motor pool closed down, Make them all feel what the normal American feels for a change, And if they feel we can go into default, all of the benefits they get end until 1) we have a balanced budget, 2) 50% of the National debit is paid off and continuing to go down, States if they choose can make up the difference but no government funds shale they receive, No Government Perks.

 

STRATRIDER

1:53 PM ET

July 24, 2011

GORDONO

I couldn't have said it better myself. As someone who had immigrated to the US in the mid 1970s but been going back and forth between Europe and America for the past 30 years, I'm now finding myself surrounded by American idiots and just plain selfish AH's at all levels - in business corporations, in government, at local shopping malls, in customer service, in banks, in colleges, on Wall Street, etc.

Despite all its ills, economic prolems and controversies, this country was a fairy tale of a place in the mid-1970s. Today, it's a total idiocracy. When I tell my friends and colleagues in Europe that, for example, some US states returned federal money for high-speed train projects, for ideological reasons, they think I'm lying, because conflating politics and public transport is so outlandish to their way of thinking that they think I must be lying. I trace this demise of the American paradigm to the election of a Hollywood clown as US President in 1980, as a crowning achievement of the Southern Strategy and backlash against Jimmy Carter's ineptitude. This was the opening the American right-wing proto-nazis needed over the power and proceeded to dismantle much of the New Deal.

To my mind, and many on the this and the other side of the pond agree, the previouos administration was simply a criminal enterpsise that looted the US surplace, rewarded the rich with tax brakes, with no observable benefits to the US economy, wasted money and lives on unnecessary wars, and squandered much of the goodwill the US enjoyed since WWII.

Obama is a wrong man to counter this wave of domestic fascism.
He's a lightweight, a big disappointment. Hillary would've been the right one - she's got the cojones and the proper hatred of today's GOP.

I think US is better off discarding its broken political system as well as unnecessary system of states and adopt a parliamentary system instead.
Otherwise it'll join the Third World within 10 years.

 

JCLAYTON

2:34 PM ET

July 24, 2011

What's wrong with America

This post is a perfect example of what's wrong with America. The poster loves pie-in-the-sky liberalism without having a clue about the real world. Read up on high speed trains in America. Given the cost of air travel, you'll soon find that all the research shows that high speed trains are a boondoggle and fiscally irresponsible for a government that is running $1.2 trillion dollar deficits. Most state governors are required to balance their budgets. Knowing that high speed rail will cost more money that it brings in, those governors recognize the fiscally prudent course of action. They don't reject high speed trains because they just want to be mean; they reject them because they are a stupid idea that we cannot afford in an age of trillion dollar budget deficits.

Foreign policy is also beyond Gordono's grasp. The clown President from California followed certain principals to confront Communism that resulted in the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. Just ask the Soviet Generals and political leaders at the time. No Reagan, no end of the Soviet Union. It's pretty simple. Reagan implemented those policies in the face of direct Democratic opposition and scare tactics in American and in the face of numerous protests in Europe. You would have thought that the left would have issued an apology by now to Reagan for being so utterly wrong. However, Gordono proves that many on the left are incapable of admitting their mistakes, no matter what evidence is presented.

The lunacy continues. The actual looting of America began anew in 2008 with the election of President Obama, who has striven to "spread the wealth around," as he put it. He's sought to take money from those productive Americans who have earned money through hard work to give it to non-productive people who don't work for a living and pay nothing in taxes. Taking money that doesn't belong to you is usually called "stealing" unless you're a socialist, and then it's just an odd social policy apparently designed to create dependency and destroy an economy. You get more of what you pay for and President Obama has proven this true, and his policies seem to be working in this regard. President Obama has seen fit to increase welfare benefits, and unemployment, welfare benefits and food stamps have skyrocketed under his leadership. You would think these kinds of facts would be enough to turn anyone into a conservative, but apparently facts don't matter to the left.

It's a wonder that America has survived this long with the kind of stupidity and utter lack of understanding of history, economics, and the real world. Perhaps Gordono should open the paper and see how Europe is doing before making any more absurd comparisons.

 

JCLAYTON

2:08 PM ET

July 24, 2011

Worst President Ever

Who writes this stuff? The worst Congress ever, really? The Republicans have controlled one house of Congress for 7 months, and since that time they have offered specific proposals to reduce the exploding budget deficit. Some of their proposals were politically unpopular, but obviously necessary to deal with entitlement programs in the United States, which are destroying the fiscal integrity of America.

The Democrats controlled Congress beginning in 2006. The budget deficit immediately increased dramatically in 2007, and the deficit has continued to do so exponentially. We have the same Bush-taxes, the same Bush-wars, the same Bush-prescription drug benefits, yet under their leadership, the budget ballooned to historic levels. And then from 2008 to 2010, while the Democrats controlled both Congress and the White House, the President of the United States and his Democratically controlled Congress, tripled the United States' annual budget deficit from approximately $400 billion to $1.2 as soon as the President got into office.

When he ran for that office, President Obama said that $400 billion was fiscally irresponsible and that the President was to blame. He promised to do something about it. He did, in fact, do something about it. He made the problem three times worse, and he has no plan to fix it. His proposed budget was defeated in his Democratically proposed Senate 97 to 0. He has offered no specific plan since then. The President's Administration has increased regulations, fiscal irresponsibility and business uncertainty in America, and Americans are suffering every day because of his actions.

If a Republican had this kind of track record, Foreign Policy would be writing the headline "WORST PRESIDENT EVER!" And that would be true. Instead, with a politically aligned President office, FP looks to place the blame on Congress instead of on the President where it belongs.

President Obama has utterly failed America. When will Foreign Policy hold the President accountable for all of these failures?

 

CHUCK CRANE

4:04 PM ET

July 24, 2011

Just Propaganda

Ornstein's piece is just lame propaganda intended to deflect attention from the gross incompetence of Obama. Utterly lacking in leadership, though why anyone expected the contrary mystifies me. At first I thought Obama might be the first Nobel peace price winner to order an assassination (bin Laden) but then I remembered that Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres, and Yitzhak Rabin won it in 1994, so even that dubious distinction has eluded him.

 

ISABELDELOSRIOS

2:52 PM ET

July 26, 2011

Great analysis JCLAYTON

Obama is a total failure. It's pretty obvious that he is not working for the people of America, but someone else. I expect whoever gives him the most money.

- Isabel De Los Rios

 

CHRISTMASSMS

7:40 PM ET

August 5, 2011

Are the armament that shaped

Are the armament that shaped this Congress artlessly cutting and irreversible in the near-term? It looks that way, abnormally if you agency in the accessory media, balloter costs and affective abroad issues that are broadly recognized. This cessation that we cannot about-face this anytime anon is arch abounding of my accompany and neighbors to feel we are in a aphotic moment. People who have, conceivably aboveboard and idealistically, admired our acceptable autonomous institutions feel betrayed and need to know what is love, not just by alone politicians, but by the basal systems in which these politicians operate.
Thanks
-Sam

 

CHRISTMASSMS

3:36 AM ET

August 18, 2011

I think these are the war

I think these are the war traditions set by previous govt. which Obama also continued and we don't need war, we want to save our country first. Is this our responsibility that if some country facing internal issues then American forces will go to help the govt. or public, no we have to set priority to our public first. Why we are spending so many budgets for this purpose.
Andrew from cPanel License

 

CHUCK CRANE

3:19 PM ET

July 24, 2011

Yeah, some accomplishments

This article illustrates perfectly the complete disconnect between rational citizens and "political scientists" like Ornstein. The rational citizen wants congress to act only if it can achieve results that improve the commonwealth. Passing legislation by itself is nothing; the effect achieved is all that matters. And for the 111th congress, their "major legislative accomplishments" have done practically nothing to improve the commonwealth. We had Obama dufuses Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein telling us that the stiumulus package would put us at 6.5% unemployment today http://www.economics21.org/blog/revisiting-unemployment-predictions, and we are at 9.2%. The main effect of financial reform has been to lock low-income people out of credit markets, further reducing aggregate demand. And as for Obamacare, which neatly skirted the real problem of increasing healthcare costs, it has done nothing of any consequence either.

I suggest that Ornstein return to college, study econometrics, and stop babbling about "legislative achievements".

 

PAULSTEWART

3:39 PM ET

July 24, 2011

Schizo

In short, American politics has become dysfunctional. Schizo to be blunt. You have two totalitarian sides, mostly on the right though, and certainly not the President. And they are vying as you say for their own extreme and in some cases rabidly selfish, naive and even stupid views. Couple that with the dumbing down of the electorate and the redrawing of districts to solidify "red" and "blue' states. This approach started with Gingrich and it solidified with Rove's stupid idea of making America Republican forever (I guess he favours the China style dictatorship to American freedom) and to seek only to pander to keep your party's base intact and to gain the majority by getting all those on your side plus one over the minimum needed to get elected (50% plus one vote literally). Of course that levels what is effectively half the population out in the cold. That is not what anyone had in mind. America is quickly sinking. The politicians are busy trying to "own" America while America's economy is shriveling up and its problems mounting. And what makes it worse is that the splitting of America is along the lines of the civil war. So don't be surprised if that is where you are headed. I see it in the way Boehner deals with the President. He says he is equally important to the President and implies the President is no more powerful than he is. That is not something any House Leader would ever say to GW Bush. And Boehner and his party and their hacks all are out there saying Obama lies (with the implicit point being "don't all blacks?"). America is on a path to Armageddon its only a question of time it it does not back off the politics of idiot-ology.

 

DAILYHUGHES

6:24 PM ET

July 26, 2011

You are completely correct.

I am often left pondering a number of things regarding politics. The first is wondering how stupid the people we supposedly elect think we are, and the second is how stupid have we become?

We have lived the past decade in a constant state of fear, even in the "good times." We are now being held hostage by a "debt ceiling" that everyone is now an expert on, however most of us didn't even know it existed until a few months back. If their indecision and inability to come up with a proper solution bankrupts this country, it was heading there anyway. Unfortunately, I believe they are simply creating havoc through the media so they can get ANYTHING they want passed. Of course what they agree on won't help the middle class, pay for visits to the doctor, chiropractor, or private education, but it will most certainly benefit the wealthy. It is extremely disturbing, and until we begin to live below our means and treat people better we are all going to be worse off(except the rich.)

 

PAULSTEWART

3:42 PM ET

July 24, 2011

Vote them off the island

The answer is simple. Vote all the congressional leaders who can't work with the other side out. NOW.

 

JIMHALE

12:39 PM ET

July 25, 2011

The Worst Congress?

The current Congress is not demonstrably worst than the last when the Democrats controlled both houses and the White House.....else the Democrats would have passed a budget during both of those two years.

How is it that the author blames the Republicans for that failure?

The difference between the parties at this moment that one side is hollering Default, Default, Default - seeing it coming on August 2 and alarmed at the depth of action needed - while the other is hollering Default, Default, Default - seeing it coming - times ten - in a few short years - and determined to avoid an even greater cataclysm.

One party simply believes we are spending too much and must retrench. The other thinks we are spending too little.

That is because we really have the Government Party - which gains it's support primarily from the employees and dependents of government and the Private Sector Party - which gains it strength from those in neither of those two groups.

The two groups are becoming more and more homogenous - i.e. mutually exclusive.

The country is almost evenly divided - and has been since Bush v. Gore.

Eventually, one side is going to win this fight.

If the Private Sector Party wins, and we get our house in order and can move into the future from a position of fiscal strength, democracy/representative government will survive.

If the Government Party wins, America and its Constitution will drown in a sea of red ink.

 

DAVE HARRIS

11:19 AM ET

July 27, 2011

Enemy of the state

I am old enough to remember one other time when a significant segment of the population wanted to destroy the government: the Vietnam War era. There was one big difference though; the protest was about something, specifically the war. The current hatred of the Republican party and its followers for the Democrat-led government doesn't seem to be based on anything, and the reasons given ring hollow. The national debt? Most of that was created by Republicans. The recession? Started when Republicans were in charge. The wars? Started by Republicans.
So what drives the viscious hatred, the refusal to cooperate with the president on any matter at all, even things that you'd expect Republicans to support? I suspect that the spectacle of a black president has driven a segment of the population insane. They actually believe it's not "their" country anymore. The president must be an illegal alien, a Muslim probably, who's election was a sinister conspiracy by foreign enemies. This is not a lunatic fringe notion anymore. The majority of Republicans believe it. No wonder they want to destroy the government.
Republican politicians now have a unique problem. They have to somehow convey to their followers that they agree with and support notions that are reprehensible to the majority of the population. They can't openly say that Obama is a terrorist or that a black man shouldn't be president, but they can hint around it and the message to the followers gets through. And of course they can never, ever, be seen cooperating with him in any way.
So this isn't really about the debt or the politicians, it's about us. Our darkest, most destructive and irrational impulses are about to destroy us, and we haven't a clue how to stop them.

 

MARKFUERST

12:58 PM ET

July 28, 2011

Very good summary. Where do we go?

Thank you to Mr. Ornstein for his summary of the events and trends that brought us to this horrible point.

Knowing this is a horribly difficult problem, but I would ask that he and others provide us some guidance: Where do we go from here?

Are the forces that shaped this Congress simply overwhelming and irreversible in the near-term? It looks that way, especially when you factor in the partisan media, electoral financing and re-districting issues that are widely recognized. This conclusion that we cannot reverse this anytime soon is leading many of my friends and neighbors to feel we are in a dark moment. People who have, perhaps naively and idealistically, respected our traditional democratic institutions feel betrayed, not just by individual politicians, but by the basic systems in which these politicians operate.

This system has generated and supported a level irrationality that is, I think, almost impossible to understand, unless you just descend into cynicism. How many non-partisan group that have looked at possible solutions long-term deficits support an apporach that excludes all tax increases (broadly defined)? None. How many serious, well-meaning Republicans think that Congress, as it exists today, could possibly pass a balanced budget amendment? No one. The options that appear to be "in play" are, by almost any fair measure, coming from the extremes of our political discourse. And, it appears that even the people proposing some of these solutions don't think they are going to happen or work. But they are holding out "on principle" against solutions that don't meet these clearly unworkable standards.

I, personally, have in my adult life been more on the left, more likely to favor "progressive" policies and solutions. But I have never supported or even been attracted to this kind of dogmatis. And I have always been encouraged when I read something like Mr. Ornstein's discussion, because it comes from someone who does come from a different part of the political spectrum. But his voice clearly relfects a shared concern for the well being of our country.

So I'll ask again: Mr. Ornstein, please take your analysis a few steps further. Work with other respected voices to identify some solutions.

Thank you to Foreign Policy for putting this article in the public discussion.

 

MARKFUERST

12:58 PM ET

July 28, 2011

Very good summary. Where do we go?

Thank you to Mr. Ornstein for his summary of the events and trends that brought us to this horrible point.

Knowing this is a horribly difficult problem, but I would ask that he and others provide us some guidance: Where do we go from here?

Are the forces that shaped this Congress simply overwhelming and irreversible in the near-term? It looks that way, especially when you factor in the partisan media, electoral financing and re-districting issues that are widely recognized. This conclusion that we cannot reverse this anytime soon is leading many of my friends and neighbors to feel we are in a dark moment. People who have, perhaps naively and idealistically, respected our traditional democratic institutions feel betrayed, not just by individual politicians, but by the basic systems in which these politicians operate.

This system has generated and supported a level irrationality that is, I think, almost impossible to understand, unless you just descend into cynicism. How many non-partisan group that have looked at possible solutions long-term deficits support an apporach that excludes all tax increases (broadly defined)? None. How many serious, well-meaning Republicans think that Congress, as it exists today, could possibly pass a balanced budget amendment? No one. The options that appear to be "in play" are, by almost any fair measure, coming from the extremes of our political discourse. And, it appears that even the people proposing some of these solutions don't think they are going to happen or work. But they are holding out "on principle" against solutions that don't meet these clearly unworkable standards.

I, personally, have in my adult life been more on the left, more likely to favor "progressive" policies and solutions. But I have never supported or even been attracted to this kind of dogmatis. And I have always been encouraged when I read something like Mr. Ornstein's discussion, because it comes from someone who does come from a different part of the political spectrum. But his voice clearly relfects a shared concern for the well being of our country.

So I'll ask again: Mr. Ornstein, please take your analysis a few steps further. Work with other respected voices to identify some solutions.

Thank you to Foreign Policy for putting this article in the public discussion.

 

FRED35

7:45 AM ET

July 30, 2011

Several Key Points are Missing Here

No mention here of who funds the Tea Party and who benefits from the policies pushed by them (and in their name). The impact of hard right conservative spending by wealthy donors is a key factor in the dysfunction of the government over the past three decades. Their views, and the policies pushed by groups they fund, benefit their class of super wealthy, aristocratic wealth, as well as large corporations that have found it lucrative to dodge corporate taxes (for the record, I think 20-25% would be a more healthy corporate tax rate, not the 35% book rate).

Also no mention of Pete Peterson and his decades long jihad against government spending. You also could toss in Grover Norquist and his anti-tax pledge. While both efforts are independent, they complement each other. Norquist's campaign ensures the government does not have enough money to function as a first world society, like Norway or Denmark, while Peterson's campaign ensures we destroy the social safety net (that is a key feature of first world countries) because of government debt caused by the de-taxation of the wealthiest and wealthy corporations.

Finally, the capture of the Democratic leadership, if not the party, by the same corporate interests that control the Republican party, is a huge factor in the dysfunction of Congress over the past three decades. If no one told you Obama was a Democrat, then described his health plan and other policies, as well as key appointments like Emmanuel, Geithner, and Summers, you'd say Obama was a moderate Republican at the least. In the 2012 Presidential race, if it is Obama and Romney, the status quo will win regardless.

Put another way, the 99% of Americans who are not wealthy no longer have meaningful political representation. Even Nancy Pelosi recently put out a message that it was time for the US to pursue austerity programs, that we all need to suffer. Well, not personally having caused the Wall Street meltdown, and having lost my home and life savings in foreclosure due to no fault of my own (several neighbors lost their homes which cratered everyone's market price), I beg to differ. As a citizen, I have read plenty of top tier journalism that describes what went on with Wall Street in legally actionable terms, yet see no one in jail and no one having lost their jobs. Indeed, their economic class is doing quite well relative to the 15 million of so Americans unemployed.

The key problems this country faces are the result of thirty years of de-taxation of the wealthiest and the suppression of wages (through offshoring jobs, union busting, and not keeping the minimum wage equal or near equal to inflation). The result is a small group of people (.5%) who have seen triple digit gains in income over that time while the rest have seen single digits gains on an annualized basis. You cannot run a consumer based economy if the bulk of consumers don't see their incomes rise steadily, as all income groups did between 1945 and 1981. The dysfunction in Congress is simply a reflection of this distorted, and unsustainable, economic structure. It also reflects the capture of at least the legislative branch by very active aristocratic elements in our society, both individuals and large corporations.

 

INKA987

6:16 AM ET

July 31, 2011

The REAL Problem

Our representatives seems to have forgotten their real purpose,
help real people, with real problems.
The housing crisis means families with no roof over their heads.
No jobs means parents who can't feed their children.
Health care means no children for a woman who is not able to afford expensive treatments such as in vitro fertilization
It is time to start compromise. A congressman's job is to make life better for Real human beings!

 

TEJAS RAMAKRISHNAN

6:33 AM ET

July 31, 2011

This is all high intensity.

Well, all in all, the issue is that there are very few people who care about others.
Helping people, helping others is no longer a priority for them.

Their priority is high intensity money scams, government issues and stuff. They find new and new ways to fool people into voting for them in the elections and then finally f34k us over.

I despise all politicians now and have nothing more to say about it. I wish someone could take them under a high intensity discharge stuff and shock them. :P

What we all should do is exactily this, HID

 

MICEONLY

3:19 PM ET

August 19, 2011

Problem is not that our

Problem is not that our Congress is worst, problem is with leadership. Our leadership has different motives than congress. Obama & Co. has their own interests and they have keen interest in opening new war points where American Military must not go. Legal Questions Cheers

 

STEVIEJ

5:10 PM ET

August 9, 2011

Brinkmanship over debt ceiling was a disaster

The brinkmanship over the debt ceiling was appalling and the American people has got to make sure it does not happen again. The Tea Party is clearly to blame and the American people need to make them face the music over this. The juvenile antics of the more colorful Tea Party members may make good entertainment but right now the US needs some grown up politicians with grown up policies able to sort the US budget out.

 

RACHELL ARMANT

3:28 AM ET

August 11, 2011

Worst. Congress. Ever.

I think that
Hyper partisanship and the messy battle to raise the debt limit has caused the approval ratings of Congress to sink.
A recent CBS News/New York Times poll even had the disapproval rating of Congress at 82 percent,
the highest in decades.
Best regards:sasha grey

 

EBLOGZ.NET

11:24 AM ET

August 17, 2011

Every generation says the same thing.

It seems new because the experience is dramatically when your older.

There is one difference, everyone makes much less today so kids do need more support now, while at the same time parents are making less.

 

AXELBROOK

1:23 PM ET

August 18, 2011

Not much would have been

Not much would have been different. Though they were of different parties, both Roosevelt and Wilson were progressives (Wilson actually adopted Roosevelt-style progressiveism, which was not typical of Democrats at that time). Roosevelt had a very aggressive foreign policy as president and would have surely intervened in World War I. He most likely founded a central banking system similar to the Federal Reserve. rio virgin It was his commission, that organized after the Panic of 1907, that recommended a Fed-like system..

 

AXELBROOK

1:23 PM ET

August 18, 2011

Not much would have been

Not much would have been different. Though they were of different parties, both Roosevelt and Wilson were progressives (Wilson actually adopted Roosevelt-style progressiveism, which was not typical of Democrats at that time). Roosevelt had a very aggressive foreign policy as president and would have surely intervened in World War I. He most likely founded a central banking system similar to the Federal Reserve. rio virgin It was his commission, that organized after the Panic of 1907, that recommended a Fed-like system..

 

READWRITE

9:04 PM ET

August 21, 2011

Sad but true

This would suggest that the House Democrats would be relieved if the Senate Democrats turned to reconciliation to pass the legislation that Obama ran on, and would certainly concur in passing those bills sent over from the senior chamber. Senuke 2.0. Why do I have my doubts about that.

 

MIKESTEVENSON

8:44 PM ET

August 23, 2011

The root of the problem

If you had read and understood the Constitution at some point in the past you would know that failure to mention something means that the federal government cannot regulate it. Clickbank Scam The Constitution defines limited powers for a federal government; everything else is left to the states and the people. And yes, before you ask, this does mean that the vast majority of federal government activities are blatantly illegal.The Washington DC earthquake should be a wake up call at least.

 

FANATHIX001

4:16 AM ET

August 24, 2011

we voted them

We voted them so we should live with the consequences of our actions. I too would say that it's not the worst. Pacquiao vs Marquez Tickets There are other countries who's living with politicians the likes that we have never seen before in our country. We should look at them and consider ourselves on the better end of the stick.

 

FANATHIX001

7:46 AM ET

August 25, 2011

No not the worst

Sure they may have some problems and we have problems with them too but they are certainly not the worst that we have seen. But anyway, the article above is really very enlightening. Will definitely share it with my friends. watch mayweather vs ortiz online