Washington deadlock
July 28, 2011
When Barack Obama took the White House by storm in 2008, he made it clear from the beginning that a political program in America's interests could only be successful if it were not characterized by political entrenchment, but rather by coming together above party lines.
He called for an end to the disruption and the grueling conflicts between Democrats and Republicans, which had paralyzed the country and led to voter dissatisfaction.
But Obama's well-intended resolutions experienced a serious setback in the implementation of his first major project, the health care reform. Obama's ambitious vision - to make health care accessible to all - was picked apart in endless debates and votes. In the end, only a watered-down version was left.
A similar scenario is emerging in the current debate on raising the US debt ceiling and the impending threat that Washington will run out of money to pay its bills.
Certainly, the crisis is not solely rooted in Democrat policy. The indications were already there under Obama's predecessor George W. Bush that the United States was living above its means - not least because of the horrendous costs for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the uncontrolled awarding of housing loans. The latter ultimately caused the housing bubble to burst, unleashing a billion-dollar rescue package which in turn triggered a global financial crisis.
In the debt debate, both sides were unwilling to budge from the start. It's evident that this dispute is less about differences with respect to content, but rather about party politics. It is all about ideological wrangling that aims to get one over on the opponent, without regard for the economic consequences - not only for the US but also for Europe and Asia - not to mention the suffering population.
Characteristic of this are the statements by Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican minority leader, who said it was his task to ensure that Obama only served one term.
On the other hand, gestures by the Democrats are also not necessarily constructive. The suggestions to date for solving the conflict are more aimed at unmasking the opponent and denouncing the inflexibility of Republican Party ideology instead of working out a nonpartisan compromise. There may still be a lot of frustration among Democrats about the lost congressional elections last year and the growing influence of the radically conservative Tea Party movement. But that does not justify passing the buck back and forth.
Both sides would demonstrate greatness if they could tear down party political walls and reach an agreement in the debt conflict. One side would have to give in and in the short run deal with a political defeat. But in the long term - and many in Washington appear to have forgotten this - the public, shaken by the debate, would honor it, no later than in the next election.
President Obama appealed to both sides in a televised speech to the nation earlier this week to listen to reason. He said this was "no way to run the greatest country on Earth." But perhaps it is precisely this hubris that is the problem of the political elite in Washington right now.
Author: Rob Mudge / sac
Editor: Andreas Illmer