Will it disappear? Should it?
Senator Mc Connel's pledge to defeat President O might justbguarantee gridlock. Will President want to work with a Senate Leader whom wants to drive him from office? Is this what Americans want? Is this what they said with there votes on Tuesday? Maybe? Maybe not?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Gridlock will not disappear during the next two years of the new congressional session. Gridlock will increase on issues that both parties don't agree on in principle. They will argue about the health care legislation, did it go too far, not enough? They will debate the Afghanistan withdrawal with liberals saying its not fast enough and conservatives saying it is simply too fast. Gridlock will increase, but this gridlock will force both sides to compromise more, meaning that much legislation that will be passed in the next two years will not be satisfactory to liberals or conservatives, but maybe that is what the American people want.
ReplyDeleteI agree with aaron on this, he makes a great point that often times gridlock isn't a bad thing and can lead to effective compromise and legislation passing. And he hits a good point that most Americans don't lie in the extreme conservative or liberal, but are more of a compromise themselves, so this legislation will better represent them.
ReplyDeleteI too agree with aaron and connie that gridlock can be a very effective mechanism for compromise, but at the same time its slow making it hard for people to deal with. People in general, don't like uncertainty in their government and when our government struggles to resolve the citizens concerns on the health care and the bill that goes with it, the war with Iraq and Afghanistan, the state of our economy, our federal problem (debt, medical marijuana, budget, etc.) they begin to get upset and lose sovereignty in the people leading.
ReplyDeleteI just think the new people in office should stand for what they believe in, but try to see the other side. This way compromise can happen a lot sooner. Citizens normally can live with a happy middle.
While I do believe that both sides need to work together, President Obama really needs to take a hard look at what the voters were saying this past Tuesday and if he does not Girdlock is an absolute certainty. This election, as stated many times before, was not an election for republicans, it was an election against President Obama's agenda. If America is to move forward, President Obama must swallow his pride and work with the newly elected congress to cut spending and use self-control in Government. That being said, if the republicans go against the will of the people and fall into the same problems as they did before being voted out in 2006, come 2012 democrats or a third party will control a majority of America and the republicans party may as well opt out for a few decades.
ReplyDeleteThe President needs to understand that America is a country where ideologies fall in the center. Big government, including a full take-over of health care, is a liberal agenda that most Americans are not willing to accept. Senator McConnel needs to do the same.
While I don't disagree that gridlock is good, I think the way we're getting to gridlock is bad. Congress is set up so that bills can pass through the House relatively easy, and then the Senate slows everything down. I think this is enough gridlock, I don't think we need theatrics and single-mindedness holding up the process too. The people we elect to Congress are supposed to be intelligent, humane people. What McConnell said is what is wrong with the democratic process right now. People won't hear one another's sides. I don't think every member of Congress needs to be chummy with one another, but there should be a mutual respect for the other and ideas from both sides. Quite frankly, aside from a few polarizing issues, the sides aren't all that different. Money, of course, is handled differently on both sides, but that's not necessarily bad. I think the reminder of being more careful, someone fighting for discretion, is good.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the stimulus argument goes- it's moot. We passed that because it was a very scary time and we worried, and democrats finally had more access to cash. Let's not forget that the Bush Administration did those rebate checks, (though far less money, it wasn't an investment-based stimulus) and those did nothing. Both sides have horrible ideas, and both sides have good ideas, but by making things so hard, we run the risk of this happening everytime. Democrats get the majority, so we spend. Republicans get the majority, so we reverse health care legislation or cut taxes. It's just going to keep tugging back and forth and there won't be any consistency. That's worrisome to me, because many of these policies are long term (which is what I would love to the government care more about- particularly in terms in education, which is sure to be the first thing cut) and so the policies cannot meet their full potential with an impatient public and legislature.
Also, on the note of what this election says, Obama's approval ratings have risen. I think all the election says is that people are impatient and scared, which is ok and natural in my mind.
http://www.wtma.com/rssItem.asp?feedid=112&itemid=29595783
I think that having this Gridlock will not help any of the issues we have. Its statements like Senator McConnel's that caused all of the issues in these past two years. The Republican Party has 1 agenda and thats attack the President in anyway. I personally believe that the President has done nothing wrong and especially with this situation that was thrown in his hands like in a game of hot potato but with nobody throw it to he is glad to hold it in his hands. I hope that in these next two years Americans will realize that the issues that we are trying to fix are not being fixed by the party that won this election.
ReplyDeleteI think that statements such as the one made by Senator McConnel are exactly what Americans don't want their representatives to say. We want our elected officials to work together to lead our country, not to work against the people who you disagree with. I find it pathetic that one of the first statements by a new majority leader is so blatantly partisan. If statements like these continue, by either party, a state of gridlock is sure to happen, and it might mean that the Democrats will regain control over the House and possibly retain control of the presidency in 2012. Elected officials should be working as best as the can with each other to fix our nation, and they should not be continue to encourage partisanship and stubbornness.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do believe that the gridlock of the federal government could be frustrating at times, I really feel that it is protecting our best interests. Rather than the government taking huge steps in one direction or another, they will be forced to take things slowly, formulating compromises that best suit the needs of the greatest number of people.
ReplyDeleteWhat I perceive as the greatest benefit from the predicted two-year gridlock would be a reduction in government spending. I think that in a capitalist society, we're bound to hit a period of economic downturn, causing the federal government to react rashly. Rather, we need to let the 'infection run its course', as opposed to the old, tired idea of the government "doing something" every time an economic problem occurs.
While I'm neither a democrat or a republican, I'm hoping that this gridlock within the government will help to moderate what I perceive as wanton spending, and help us get our economy back on track without too much government interference.
I believe this issue of gridlock should disappear, and for good reason. It doesn't make rational sense to put two people, Obama and senetor McConnel, in competition with each other because the outcome would be that of disaster, enabling nothing to get done and progress. I believe that this particular situation is far from what the American people want, actually the last thing the American people want. Who wants a government, and members of that government to be rivals when really they are supposed to be working together for the common good? I don't.
ReplyDeleteI believe that this so called gridlock will not happen. A senator versus a president will never work I think just because of the fact that when voters see a senator go against the standing president no one would want to take part in that. I think that the government should never allow a gridlock to happen just because the way things with the senate and the house are now getting something down is already slow. I personally believe that the President has done nothing wrong and believe that lots of people put the blame on him for doing nothing but in reality its hard to recover a country after all of the damage the former presidents have done.
ReplyDeleteI don't really think it's "a senator versus a president." It's a senator taking a contrary stance because that's the easier thing to do. Right now McConnel can do what many did in the election and post election, they get to bottle up and condense everything they are angry, frustrated and annoyed about into one concrete place- President Obama. It may be the administration as a whole, the legislation Obama has pushed, or the general chaos of our budget and priorities list, whatever it is that someone is upset about, President Obama can in some way be found accountable so that's what we push it to. But it's sort of like blaming your parents for being a problem child, at some point, you have to realize that it wasn't all them (or it wasn't them at all) and shape up. (I guess with the same metaphor, that sort of blame is bound to happen and a natural reaction though).
ReplyDeleteI think Gridlock will not disappear, but I think it will just force both sides to compromise on nearly every issue, it should be an interesting congressional session. I don't think the Republicans will shut down the government like they did in the 90's because it backfired on them and probably led to Bill Clinton being re-elected.
ReplyDeleteI agree with aaron's post.
ReplyDeleteThis is the Republican's second chance.
Everyone knows the last time they were in power they didn't do so well, especially economically, even Dr. Ball, in the symposium pointed this out.
I believe the GOP will take a long hard look at what happened last time, during the Clinton administration, and really try and do things differently.
It's unfortunate that Senator McConnel is looking solely to defeat President Obama, and not on the current issues at hand. Both should look at the issues facing us currently, instead of worrying about the Republicans versus the Democrats. That's why I believe this so called "gridlock" is nothing but a distraction.
ReplyDeleteI agree with "plapoint" gridlock and parties attacking one another does not help anything. However, its a natural occurrence amongst the different parties. I think a lot of our issues stem from our over consumption of goods and our role as a big brother figure. In this world we can no longer express ourselves militaristic-ally but we must express ourselves in a new stable welcoming system.
ReplyDeleteI agree with everyone's opinion concerning gridlock. I think that gridlock will happen if both parties do not come together and learn to give in take in certain policy makings. Also, I agree with Macrea when he brought up the point that although we do not want gridlock we want out Congressmen to be able to listen to our views concerning health care reform, because one of the reasons for such a dramatic change in in Congress was because our views and opinions were not being listened to. I hope to see that we do not stay in gridlock and get policies passed that are for the good of the Nation.
ReplyDeleteI completely disagree with Ivana's comment regarding Senator McConnel, stating, "I don't think we need theatrics and single-mindedness holding up the process too." McConnel's statements are not theatrics. They were echoed from the voices of the people who spoke with their votes on election day. What American's want, they voted for, and I can say with certainty they were against President Obama's agenda. If the President keeps proposing the same reforms Senator McConnel should not only push for a Gridlock, he has a duty to Gridlock.
ReplyDeleteMcConnel's words do not come from his single-mindedness, they come from his American-mindedness. That in itself makes me proud to have him as a leader and helps to instill some comfort that the will of the people this last election will be upheld.
Sasha's comment, "because one of the reasons for such a dramatic change in Congress was because our views and opinions were not being listened to" ties completely into this. We have leaders in Congress listening to our views now and that is why if Obama goes against them, Gridlock is necessary.
On the other hand, from a different perspective from my last posting on this topic, I do agree with both Connie and Aaron in some aspects. Although my true beliefs are that gridlock should not be happening in our government, I can see why such gridlock may lead to an overall better compromise. With both sides having completely different views on an issue, although it may cause tension and bitter argument, the result, as both Connie and Aaron stated, may be able to work out for the best generating a better compromise.
ReplyDeleteWell then, I don't get American mindedness, Macrea. I just see it as childishness. I don't think one has to be a brick wall to get a point across. There's a difference between aggressiveness and assertiveness. I'll agree to disagree with you, though, you have a good case- I just don't see it that way.
ReplyDelete