Compromise Cannot Mean Capitulation
- Print print this page
- Discuss 7 comments, Blog about
Advertisement
Eighth in a Series
This is the eighth of a series in which Moore County’s Republican and Democratic party chairmen will address various political issues. Today's issue deals with the newly installed Congress. Jim Heim is chairman of the Moore County Democratic Party. Robert M. Levy is chairman of the Moore County Republican Party. Click here for Heim's take on the issue.
During the Cold War, a friend of mine once told me of what he called a “Soviet compromise.”
It occurs when, after years of savings, you buy a brand-new Ford truck. Proudly, you bring the new truck home. Then, your neighbor, in the midst of his statement of glowing admiration, suddenly argues that the vehicle ought to be his.
You bought it. It’s yours. The neighbor’s statement is absurd, and you tell him so. “Well, then,” the neighbor responds, “let’s compromise. We’ll sell your new truck and split the proceeds.”
In 2008, when the Democrats got their “filibuster-proof” Senate majority and overwhelming majority in the House of Representatives, they were not interested in compromise. Bills were passed without representatives or the public knowing their content. Billions were spent on pet partisan projects in support of traditional Democrat allies like unions and state government workers.
In fact, so much money was appropriated that the biggest problem was that states and cities could not spend it fast enough. And all this was done without even passing a budget for the last fiscal year.
Between 2008, when they lost the presidency, and the 2010 Congressional elections, Republicans worked hard to get their message out: It was unwise to give Democrats unchecked control over the Congress and the White House. By hard, grassroots organizing, Republicans finally obtained the votes that had gone to Democrats two years before.
But after the Republican Party got its electoral victory, the Democrats wanted to “compromise” by claiming half the Republican victory to be theirs. It did not work in the Cold War, and it should not work now.
Yes, compromise is necessary for effective government. But to the extent compromise means socialized medicine, but only at a slower pace, or out-of-control spending, only in a less rapid fashion, then the idea of “compromise” is the same as the idea of “capitulation.” “Compromise” cannot mean “surrender,” leaving as the only issue the rate at which the forces of freedom give up their arms.
The method of compromise in Democratic Washington has been the “political payoff.”
If one senator will not support a bill, you build him a “bridge to nowhere” or use the Treasury to make his pork barrel fatter. The money borrowed from China makes the senator’s re-election more certain and the rest of America more destitute.
If there is a message in the most recent congressional election, it is certainly that people want the health care reform law repealed. But to stop with this analysis alone is like trying to evaluate an apple pie by just tasting the crust.
The American people want Washington to conduct its business in a new and open 21st century manner.
Bills must be placed on the Internet so the people can comment before they become law. Politicians must be unafraid to test their policies in public discourse before voting for new burdens on already fragile freedoms.
Compromise is important and indeed essential to proper American government. But it requires a precedent of open, public debate to which politicians must listen and act accordingly.
This Congress — which will sit between 2011 and 2013, one house Democratic and one house Republican — can govern effectively with the essential compromises that must be made. It can and will pass a budget. It can and will reverse the march toward government-controlled health care and a centrally planned economy. But it will only do this if the people of the United States remind their leaders that government “derives its just powers from the consent of the governed.” Legislation cannot be passed now and explained later.
Americans expect compromise. The Congress can deliver it. Spending can be decreased. Legislation can be refocused on promoting free enterprise rather than government control. But it can only be delivered when disinfected with sunlight. To do less would not be compromise; it would be the continuance of corruption. And America has no more money to waste on the corrupt practices of the past, whether or not it is called “compromise.”
If politicians possess nothing else, they do have a general sense of the mood of the people who elected them. This writer suspects that most senators and representatives have already come to the conclusions outlined above.
Therefore, we should all be optimistic about the possibility of real congressional compromise.
Open debate about the weakness of the dollar and the resulting rise in the price of fuel will require new solutions that may defy the traditional barriers between Republicans and Democrats.
Our country was founded upon the idea of checks and balances. The election of 2008 gave too much power to one party alone, eliminating the necessity of compromise. The election of 2010 took back some of that power, making compromise a requirement.
Having stripped the Democrats of their power monopoly and having given clear instruction as to the conservative direction to which they want to take the nation, a working majority of Republicans and “Blue Dog” Democrats within Congress will recognize the current reality.
Therefore, they will govern more effectively and openly than the Congress just past with a proud 21st century spirit of true compromise.
Robert M. Levy is chairman of the Moore County Republican party. Contact him at Law52@prodigy.net.
More like this story
Advertisement
Comments
nothingspecial 2 years, 3 months ago
Mr. Levy, every word a pleasure and very inspiring, thank you.
hotdiggity 2 years, 3 months ago
Mr. Levy, a very well written column about the issue of compromise. I hope the Republican Party that was just handed the victory of not only the U. S. Congress, but also more importantly the N. C. State Senate and House, realize that it was the voters that give this chance. WE do not want compromise, WE want the leadership of our elected officials to guide this great Country and State from the brink of finacial ruin. The actions of the democratic party speak for themselves and allow no room for compromise for the sake of compromise, but only destruction.
madstork 2 years, 3 months ago
Is it just a coincidence that the republican leader's column has 2 positive comments, and that Heim (Dem Leader) has 85? Many of which are Jim Heim having to defend his position.
JimHeim 2 years, 3 months ago
Madstork, how's that counting job coming. Do you have enough fingers to keep a tally?
OldSpook 2 years, 3 months ago
Wow Jim, that childish comment is just another good reason that while I may not be a Republican, I am definitely not a Democrat.
JER 2 years, 3 months ago
I'm convinced that the only way we're going to determine what is the best course of action is for the Republicans to have a majority in both the House and Senate and a Republican president (I prefer Palin for this job). This should provide enough rope for them to hang themselves. Let them have at it a let's see what happens. I'm old and won't have to suffer long if their ideas fail and both my kids are conservative Republicans, so they will have to live with whatever the results may be. If their ideas get us out of the current situation, we can all admit we were wrong and thank them for being so smart. I know that Republicans have had the majority before and it didn't work out as well as they had planned, but this time they'll have much better leadership.
MikeNC 2 years, 3 months ago
I'm glad you have seen the light JER...That is refreshing....Mike
nothingspecial 2 years, 3 months ago
I agree too JER, except that, although we love Sarah Palin and think she is a very capable person, and Conservative leader, we don't generally believe she is the best presidential candidate right now. Your idea though is witty I'm sure for your side.
JER 2 years, 3 months ago
I'm glad all the conservative Republicans liked my post but I sense you may have missed the part where my tongue was firmly planted in my cheek. I thought the part about the rope would give you a clue, or the part about Sarah and the comment about now having better leadership. But the main point of my post remains: Saying it, like James outlines, and doing it are two different things.
Ross 2 years, 3 months ago
Amazing - One would think after 8 years of mindless republican rule, the right wingers would be a bit wary of boasting :)
OldSpook 2 years, 3 months ago
Ross,
Chill out, take a prozak and a pint of cheap wiskey. It might help the rest of us.
Ross 2 years, 3 months ago
oldspook - great retort - full of insight.
if you don't wish to read my posts simply ignore them. That's what I do with yours :)
JimHeim 2 years, 3 months ago
RINO - Republican In Name Only. What's a RHINO?
nothingspecial 2 years, 3 months ago
The hubris of the Democratic majority the past two years has been a lesson for both parties about not being too cocky and ignoring the ongoing will of the people. We Republicans also learned lessons from the lost opportunities and mistakes of the Republican majority during President Clinton.
Ross 2 years, 3 months ago
what a joke - republicans wrecked this country with 8 years of their destructive control and now after 2 years of major accomplishments by the dems - they continue spew their silly verbiage.
btw - nothingspecial - you name is very apt and fitting!
OldSpook 2 years, 3 months ago
"2 years of major accomplishments by the dems "
And just what color is the sky in your world?
Ross 2 years, 3 months ago
you need to chill our oldspook - light one up - take a deep drag and smile :)
make sure you have a bad of munchies on hand though :)
OldSpook 2 years, 3 months ago
Hmmmm, I think I like your advise on this one. Mind bringing that bottle of whiskey over? Cheers/Dave
nothingspecial 2 years, 3 months ago
ROSS: "...and now after 2 years of major accomplishments by the dems"
I agree with you that they did some "major" things. That's why a great many dems who could be fired, were in November. For instance biggest change of power in North Carolina in over 100 years in November. That's what I call major. 1.5 Trillion projected deficit in 2011, that's major too. By the way they're not accomplishments when they don't know what they're voting on until after they sign it (Nancy Pelosi during the Health Care Bill vote) or they push things thru in a partisan way. That tired Democrat drone of the "party of no" is an excuse as it was in Carter's time.
Ross 2 years, 3 months ago
nothingspecial - they were "fired" because of the "economy" - little else!
Obama inherited a sad economic state of affairs and two years later it is picking up. Quite an accomplishment considering it took 8 years of republican rule to screw it up so bad.
If asked to choose, I would take debt over a major depression (which many top economists are suggesting) any day!
Lets be honest - BOTH parties are to blame and BOTH parties have had some great plans. I am so tired of one party claiming to possess all of the great ideas while casting the other as incompetent. I am neither democrat or republican and I would simply like to see both work together.
If that actually seems to be happening I am certain I will wake up and it will be time to head off to work.
nothingspecial 2 years, 3 months ago
Big difference of opinion about why the firing and about what are good plans and what's been accomplished, but sure second your point that it would be amazing and great to see some working together between the two parties this time around.