Hss assignment – Due 6/5
Download 1.3 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Bipart is key to obama’s agenda.
- Bipart key to agenda – spills over
- Bipart key to obama agenda.
- Partisanship Spills Over
- AT: Bipart Key – Impossible
- Declining moderate numbers mean attempts at bipart fail.
- No bipart – gop obstructionism.
BipartBipart KeyBipart key to agenda.JACOBY 11-4-10. [Tamar, President, ImmigrationWorks USA, “Immigration reform is still doable” CNN] In a lopsided Congress, where one party has a supermajority or close, there's little or no incentive to compromise -- you can pass almost anything you want without making nice, so why make concessions to get a deal? This will no longer be true in the 112th Congress: Little if anything is going to pass without compromise. Neither party will have much to show for itself if it does not find ways to work across the aisle. And just saying "no" to the other side's proposals is likely to wear thin very quickly with the independent voters who decided this election and the last one and will surely be the prize in 2012. Bipart key to agenda.COLLINSON 11-15-10. [Stephen, AFP writer, “Obama lands back in changed Washington” AFP] President Barack Obama landed in a politically-changed Washington after 10 days abroad and called on newly empowered Republicans to drop their strategy of 'No' to work with him. Obama returned from Asia to reverberating aftershocks of mid-term elections which dealt Democrats a crushing defeat and handed Republicans the House of Representatives -- and the means to halt his reform program. Flying into Washington on Air Force One on Sunday, after a trip that circled the globe, Obama reflected on the meaning of the election defeat two weeks ago, and promised to do more to honor his previous vows to reach across the aisle. He said that early in his term, an "obsessive" focus on anti-crisis policies had led him to neglect the need to reach across political divides and to get out into the heartland to explain to Americans what he was doing. Bipart is key to obama’s agenda.GALSTON 10. [William, Senior Fellow, Governance Studies, Brookings, “President Barack Obama’s First Two Years: Policy Accomplishments, Political Difficulties” Brookings Institute -- Nov 4] The outcome of the November 2010 election has fundamentally changed the political dynamic for at least the next two years. It will no longer be possible for President Obama to advance his agenda with support from only his own party. Instead, he will be forced either to negotiate with an emboldened Republican House majority or endure two years of confrontation and gridlock. (As Newt Gingrich discovered in 1995, the same logic applies in reverse: it is no easier to run divided government from Capitol Hill than from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.) Choosing the path of negotiation over confrontation would require a change of substance as well as tone. The president would have to give the federal budget deficit and national debt a far more central place in his policy agenda. Here the obstacles to agreement across party lines are formidable, although the findings of his bipartisan fiscal commission, due out in December, may assist him in making a shift to a more fiscally conservative position. It helps that the co-chairs of the commission, Democrat Erskine Bowles and Republican Alan Simpson, are determined to break the current gridlock, in which conservatives refuse to consider raising taxes while those on the left stoutly resist cuts in social programs. Bipart key to agenda – spills overZelizer 9 (Julian, Prof Public Affairs @ Princeton, CNN, 1/13) Obama will have to define himself in relation to his predecessor, but in this case by demonstrating clearly to the public what he will do differently, rather than the same, as President Bush. And, finally, the new president will need to find legislation that attracts some support from the opposition to diminish the power of polarization on Capitol Hill and establish the groundwork for future compromise. Bipart key to obama agenda.News and Observer 8. [11/7, Lexis] Such a move toward bipartisanship may be challenged by those who think the Bush partisans have some payback coming. But if Obama can rise above that instinct, he will have taken some important initial steps in bringing a much-divided country together, and in easing the way for his ambitious agenda to clear the Congress. If the people are ready, and they have signaled resoundingly that they are, then Republican and Democratic leaders need to be ready as well. Partisanship Spills OverPartisanship spills over on security policy specifically.COHEN 1. [WILLIAM, counselor @ CSIS and former Secretary of Defense, Washington Quarterly -- Spring -- lexis] Finally, a more bipartisan approach to the formulation of national security policy specifically can only occur with a less partisan approach to political discourse generally. Social and political observers alike have chronicled an absence of civility in the public sphere and increasing hostility in the political sphere. Debate too often gives us a way to diatribe, and practical problem-solving to rhetorical finger-pointing. At times – such as the Desert Fox strikes – the enmity has become so intense that some openly question the motivations of the leaders on the opposite side of the aisle. At other times – such as during the national debate on the CTBT – incendiary rhetoric is used to inflame core constituencies, gain political advantage, or to humiliate or embarrass one’s opponents. Such scorched earth tactics may be chauvinistically satisfying, but they only diminish the trust and respect among policymakers that is essential to responsible and reason compromise. AT: Bipart Key – ImpossibleZero chance for bipartisanship – fewer moderates and re-election worries.KNOLL 10. [Benjamin, Assistant Prof of Govt’ @ Centre College, researcher focused on public opinion and voting behavior of the American public, “Prospects for “bipartisanship” in the 112th Congress” Novemver 7 -- http://informationknoll.wordpress.com/2010/11/07/prospects-for-bipartisanship-in-the-112th-congress/] It would be nice if the results of last Tuesday’s election prompted our political leaders to seek common ground, put aside their differences, and do what’s best for the future of the country. But it’s not going to happen. Why? For several reasons, including these two: 1. There are fewer moderate members of Congress now. Most of the Democrats who were swept out of office last week were moderate Democrats from conservative districts. Ideologically speaking, the “average” Democrat in the House is now much more liberal than the “average” Democrat in the last Congress. And because of the election of a number of Tea Party Republicans, the “average” Republican is now going to be much more conservative. The two parties in Congress will now be even more ideologically polarized, if such a thing were possible. 2. It’s election season. Again. But not for 2010; for 2012. Yep, the 2012 presidential campaign began last Wednesday morning. Politically speaking, Republicans have very little incentive to provide President Obama with any sort of legislative victory, as it would only aid his reelection chances in 2012. Thus, they will be even less likely to want to “compromise” than they were before last week’s election, making the prospects for “bipartisan” accomplishments on any substantive piece of legislation very, very unlikely. Declining moderate numbers mean attempts at bipart fail.BARRON 11-4-10. [John, Inside American presenter on ABC NewsRadio, research associate @ US Studies Centre @ U of Sydney, “The Doughnut Election” ABC -- http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/11/04/3056619.htm?site=thedrum] Already president Obama is being urged to "shift to the political centre" - to do as Bill Clinton did after he suffered massive losses in the 1994 mid-terms and abandon more divisive agenda items like health care and gays serving openly in the military. But even some Clinton insiders, like former labor secretary Robert Reich, say the political centre just doesn't exist - shift to the centre and you'll find you are all alone. American politics is more like a doughnut. And this is clearly a problem for any attempts at bipartisanship. When the democrats enjoyed a 60-40 Senate majority, there was no need to compromise. Which was just as well because there were only one or two moderate Republicans who might have ever considered a compromise. Usually when a chamber like the Senate swings back to closer to 50-50 that means you'll get more moderates in swinging electorates prepared to cut a deal and cross the floor. But not this time. Tea Party-backed freshmen Republican senators like Rand Paul from Kentucky and Marco Rubio in Florida immediately become the least likely to join with the Democrats. And Democrats like Evan Bayh of Indiana who frequently voted with the Republicans saw the writing on the wall and quit politics this year in disgust, while liberals capable of bipartisandship like Russ Feingold of Wisconsin got creamed. No bipart – gop obstructionism.SKOCPOL AND JACOBS 10. [Theda, Victor S. Thomas Professor of Government and Sociology at Harvard, former Director of the Center for American Political Studies, Lawrence, Walter F. and Joan Mondale Chair for Political Studies and Director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance in the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute and Department of Political Science at the University of Minnesota, “Reaching for a New Deal: Ambitious governance, economic meltdown and polarized politics in Obama’s first two years” Russell Sage Foundation -- October] The immediate prospect for Congressional Republicans to work with Obama and Democrats to solve major national problems is poor to nonexistent, following Tea Party 59 primary victories against longtime conservative incumbents such as Utah’s Bob Bennett and party-endorsed candidates such as Delaware’s Mike Castle. Those two had occasionally collaborated across the aisle, and the clear message is ―cross-party cooperation is a political death sentence.‖ In case the risk has not already been made crystal clear, GOP legislators face continuing scrutiny from grass-roots extremists who hate Obama. Some pundits blame Obama for such polarization and deadlock, but the logic is puzzling, given the severity of the problems the President has had to tackle and his repeated efforts to find compromises with Republicans. It is hard to see anything more at work in the recent intense polarization than strategic choices by Obama’s opponents and the media dynamics and institutional advantages for obstruction we have discussed above – all of these interacting with the profound social demoralization caused by a deep and prolonged economic downturn. Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 1.3 Mb. Share with your friends:
|