“No Man’s life liberty or property is safe while the legislature is in session”.

- attributed to NY State Judge Gideon Tucker

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

Wonderboy As The New Jimmy Carter

Roughly a month ago, the Wall Street Journal published an editorial by Peter Wehner, a former official in several Republican administrations, entitled, "No, America Isn't Ungovernable."

Written in the wake of Scott Brown's election to a Massachusetts Senate seat, Wehner's piece catalogued liberals' knee-jerk whining that government no longer 'works' whenever the electorate doesn't see fit to vote their way, or support their Progressive agenda.

Wehner identifies several typical Progressive rants when faced with dissenting voters:

-stupid Americans who don't know what's good for them
-"nihilistic" Republicans who block all change
-an "ungovernable" America in need of Constitutional change to allow speedier action

The first two explanations for Progressive failure are, on their face, simply wrong.

You cannot simply dismiss voter sentiment as wrong when it doesn't go your way. Further, it becomes supremely arrogant to lie to voters about the consequences of legislation, then pronounce them too stupid to be capable of recognizing where their own interests lie.

As Wehner points out, and the recent, post-editorial health care conclave at Blair House demonstrated, Republicans have had plenty of ideas on genuinely reforming health insurance and care. Paul Ryan, Lamar Alexander and their colleagues enumerated many good ideas which could be legislated in pieces to reform current shortcomings without nationalizing the entire sector.

But the final rant of Progressives is the most alarming. Faced with dissent, they simply declare a need to rip up the Constitution, as well as standing Congressional procedures, e.g., the Senate 2/3 majority rule for passage of legislation, in order to "govern."

This equates Progressive notions with truth and correctness, while those who disagree are to be marginalized by whatever means necessary, including Constitutional subversion.

Wehner reminds us of Carter's counsel, Lloyd Cutler, opining in 1980,

"one might say that under the U.S. Constitution it is not now feasible to 'form a Government.' The separation of powers between the legislative and executive branches, whatever its merits in 1793, has become a structure that almost guarantees stalemate today."

Funny how, in Carter's wake, Ronald Reagan did just fine moving most of his agenda through a Democratic-controlled Congress, isn't it?

I guess Cutler was wrong. America wasn't ungovernable, it's just that Jimmy Carter wasn't up to the task.

Neither, evidently, is Barry Obama. Thus the reference to him by some who say he seeks to rule, not to govern.

No comments: