Conservatives must learn from the shutdown

Speaker Boehner: ‘’We just didn’t win’’

16 days overdue, thus ends an American take on Monty Python. Without the satire.

The White House has preserved ObamaCare, Democrats have won clean resolutions and the GOP has been humbled into a very public and very bloody retreat.

For Republicans, there are only two positives.

First, with this deal, the Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell, has probably saved the GOP from being vanquished in next year’s Mid-Terms. Second, McConnell has challenged the President to live up to his word and engage in serious negotiations (my take on 'serious') before next January. In short, McConnell has given CPR to a party drowning in emotion.

For leading the GOP off its Maginot Line, McConnell deserves the gratitude of all conservatives.

Unfortunately, he won’t get it. 

Instead, the very opposite is likely to occur. Conservative firebrands will rage against his ‘betrayal of conservative values’. McConnell’s primary challenger, Matt Bevin, can expect his campaign coffers to brim. After all, for a loud but vocal conservative minority, compromise is treason. A capital crime. 

This insipid absolutism can’t continue. It’s time for us, the majority of conservatives; the ‘quiet conservatives’, to bring reason back to Republican politics.

For a start, we need to recognize what we’re up against - that there are those in our movement who see ‘purity’ as their defining cause. That for these conservatives, politics isn’t about asserting an agenda, it’s about purging the ‘ideologically impure’. We need to recognize that these partisans see themselves as the modern incarnations of John Stark’s heroic toast, - ‘’Live free or die; death is not the worst of evils.’’ That for these men and women, political death is preferable to compromise.

Next, we need to point out the fallacy of their argument.

Let’s cut the faux patriotism, ObamaCare is not the British Army and this isn’t the Revolutionary War. In their struggle, Stark and his comrades were fighting for an ideal that was both pure and possible – freedom and independence.

Neither was true with regards to the GOP strategy on ObamaCare. As I argued earlier this week, demanding that Obama sacrifice his landmark law was always implausible. Democrats control the Senate and the Executive. The Judiciary has rendered its decision- the law conforms with the Constitution. The polls were also clear- Americans might dislike ObamaCare, but they disliked the GOP’s brinkmanship even more. On top of it all, Obama had a post-Syria necessity to project clear leadership.

Unsurprisingly, the news coverage has reflected this understanding. Instead of focusing on the absurd incompetence of the ObamaCare rollout, the media set up camp on a different story – one centered in a Republican celebration of rudderless obstructionism. A political opposition marching in perfect step with Democratic propaganda. A modern tea party… without the tea.

For conservatives, this strategic delusion speaks to our burgeoning fetish - self-immolation at the shrine of partisan resistance.

Over the last two weeks, the House GOP has rendered itself the governing equivalent of a skydiving team without parachutes- for two minutes, soaring ecstasy as the jumpers sail through the clouds. Until terminal velocity meets certain gravity. Then truth renders its judgment – the illusion of omnipotence at an awful price. Self-destruction is the nemesis of political reason.

If we’re serious about preventing an American welfare state, we conservatives need to get serious.

We need to grasp the virtuous truth- that Political leadership demands both courage and rationality. That in a democracy, believing alone isn’t enough. In the end as with all arguments, political success requires presenting a case, persuading voters and pursuing change.

The alternative is what we’ve seen today. A gleeful Democratic party, a preaching President and a Republican brand that’s bobbing in the sewer.

Please watch video below for my thoughts on broader issues involved.

Why we need a ‘Grand Bargain’ and why it's also possible

‘’John Boehner is like a Republican state senator. He’s a golf-playing, cigarette-smoking, country club Republican, who’s there to make deal. He’s very familiar to me.’’

President Obama

‘’The President and I, as I’ve made clear, have a very good relationship.’’

John Boehner

Paul Ryan is right - debt negotiations are long overdue. In his op-ed, the Wisconsin Congressman focuses on serious reforms. For a start, he suggests a GOP openness to raising medicare premiums for the wealthy. Raising taxes on the wealthy? Hardly the ramblings of an ideological warmonger.

But Ryan's seriousness only speaks to a broader, growing movement in the GOP.

Recognizing that Obama cannot and will not yield on ObamaCare, a number of Congressional Republicans are hinting at an alternate path towards ending the shutdown. Instead of focusing on health care, they want to pursue a ‘grand bargain’ with Democrats- addressing spending, revenue and entitlement reforms all at once. However, as Robert Costa has noted, other House Republicans are focused on a smaller deal - one that ends the shutdown but kicks big reforms down the road.

I understand the skepticism, but America needs a ‘grand bargain’. In the end, it’s the only way that we’ll cut to the heart of the shutdown.

Let’s be clear. Ultimately, this standoff wasn’t caused by ObamaCare. It’s always been about a bigger issue; the most abiding of political issues – the question of America’s state-society relationship. We’re witnessing a broader struggle for America’s future.

On one side, Democrats believe that the Federal government should constitute the central, redistributive support structure for those in economic difficulty.

In the GOP, the power of social conservatism is being displaced by an energetic fusion of fiscal conservatism and libertarianism. Still, the central Republican belief remains the same - that the common good is best served by facilitating individual aspiration.

In governing practice, where liberals see virtue in an American version of the European style ‘safety net’ social contract, conservatives (like myself) see disaster.

But though they're passionately held, these ideological divisions hide a simple truth.

We’ve seen the dividend of years of dysfunctional government. It hasn’t worked. Instead, Americans need a grand solution that rebuilds our political discourse. We need a solution in which both sides give and get. In short, we need Republicans to yield on sensible revenue generation and Democrats yield on entitlement reform.

For sure, the hacks will scream. Nevertheless, a ‘grand bargain’ compromise needn’t be toxic (my proposal!). Just as revenue generation can be centered in tax code reforms, entitlement reform can be rooted in protecting America’s most vulnerable. When the governing pillars of prosperity, responsibility and social justice are mutually reliant, all sides win.

And don’t believe the doubters, a ‘grand bargain’ is politically possible.

Consider Boehner’s warning that he won’t allow a debt default to occur. This message carries an implicit understanding – if necessary, Boehner will rely upon Democratic votes. Yet the Speaker knows that if breaks the ‘Hastert rule’, his Speakership may break along with it. Correspondingly, his statement illustrates something important – Boehner is willing to embrace major political risks for causes he believes in.

Recent evidence suggests that Obama may feel similarly.

In the cancellation of his long planned Asia trip (‘the pivot’ agenda being a key priority of his Administration), Obama has signaled that ending the shutdown is, at least in part, a Presidential responsibility. Though he's aware that his base is against a deal, the President also realizes that his shutdown legacy won’t be defined by the shutdown itself, but instead by what follows. More compelling - the President has regularly made clear that he wants a bargain. At this juncture, it would offer a positive conclusion to the shutdown.

In his book, ‘The Price of Politics’, Bob Woodward notes the respectful, friendly rapport that characterized the Obama-Boehner (and Biden-Cantor) interactions during the ‘grand bargain’ effort of 2011. Even though they didn’t reach a deal, the leaders ultimately respected each other.

Today, as in 2011, the President and the Speaker have two choices.

They can continue to clog Pennsylvania Avenue with partisan vitriol. Or they can take shared risks in the nation’s best interest.

How the GOP is outmaneuvering Democrats on the Shutdown

1) POLLING

The latest polls suggest that a super-majority of the American people desire a compromise solution. Yet the polls also tell another tale – there's been very little change as to who Americans regard to be responsible for the shutdown. Although the GOP is seen as marginally more to blame, the data suggests that opinion against the GOP is static. The White House expected that the opposite would occur - that once the shutdown began, the GOP would be routed by public anger. It hasn't happened.

2) PR Flowing with the polling data, the GOP’s present shutdown PR strategy is far more astute than that of Congressional Democrats/the President. While the President refuses to negotiate and overtly broadcasts an ‘'exasperated'’ demeanor – (see Obama + Reid), the GOP is staging clever PR stunts (see ‘empty chairs’ and WWII memorial funding). Essentially, the GOP have realized that now the shutdown is underway, they must be regarded as open to compromise. In contrast, the Democrats have allowed their anger to distract them away from a cognizant PR strategy.

3) POSTURE As with the sequester, the warnings of ensuing horror (at least in a immediately salient sense) have not come to pass. At the same time, with the problematic ObamaCare roll-out, the GOP’s talking points have been somewhat vindicated. In turn, this has weakened Democratic criticisms of the GOP. Republicans are more able to claim that they are being reasonable - IE – ‘all we want is a one year delay’ etc. In addition, as time goes on, the President is likely to come under increasing public scrutiny for the continuation of the shutdown – IE – as the chief executive, the public will expect Obama to lead America out of this mess. I suspect that Boehner senses the President's vulnerability on this 'leadership perception' issue. At least in part, it would explain why the Speaker is now pushing for a grand bargain.

HOWEVER... it's not all rosy for the GOP. Over the longer term, the present Republican strategy will furnish doubts among independents over the party's governing responsibility. If the GOP becomes a populist centric party – even in the sense of garnering independents over ObamaCare – it risks jeopardizing its position come the 2016 Presidential elections (a concern I've previously warned about). This is especially true with regards to national security (see DNI Clapper’s comments on the intelligence impact of the shutdown).

A 3-step ladder to escape the Shutdown hole

The Shutdown is underway, but it doesn't need to stay that way.

1) Obama and Boehner must meet

The notion that Obama and Boehner cannot stand each other is a myth.

For the most part, during their 2011 debt negotiations, the President and the Speaker were able to develop a good working rapport. Bob Woodward talks about their once budding friendship extensively in his book ‘The Price of Politics’. Alternatively, one photo provides an effective summation. Although those discussions ended in failure, their very essence proved that compromise is possible. But there’s another point here. If Obama can speak with Rouhani, he can certainly meet with the Speaker of the House of Representatives. A ten minute phone call is not the same as a face to face. Indeed, when challenged on this point yesterday, the WH Press Secretary, Jay Carney, was unable to defend the President's unwillingness to meet with the Republican leader. He was unable to do so for a simple reason – the President’s job is to find a path through the political wilderness. Even when the wilderness is not of his own making. In the same vein, Obama is the chief executive of the United States - Boehner has a responsibility to work with him. It won't be easy, but ultimately dialogue is the first step to consensus. Even if the discussions don’t immediately bring about a prosperous outcome, the imagery of constructive discussion would strengthen moderates in Congress and help foster greater trust. Aside from the intransigents, everyone would benefit. It would also help stench the hemorrhaging reputation of American political life.

2) A touch of humility

House Republicans must recognize Obama's political position. The President faces a base which is angry and ready for a fight. A base that believes he’s yielded too easily in previous showdowns with Congress. More than this, not only do liberals believe that the GOP is behaving outrageously; they also believe that any necessary spending cuts have already been implemented. At the same time, Obama must recognize that Republicans face a distinct political reality of their own. At a basic level, conservatives expect further spending cuts from the House and they feel empowered by the polling data (nevertheless, they shouldn't take this data as an endorsement for a shutdown - see the latest polling in the video below). True, in some sense, these diverging understandings suggest an unyielding standoff, yet, they also hint at a solution. Were the President to address certain elements of the non-Obamacare elements of the GOP plan (those focused on spending/keystone etc), he could induce elements of the GOP caucus into a compromise position. At the same time, Obama would ensure the survival of ObamaCare and he'd be able to take credit for guiding the country out the shutdown. Reciprocally, Republicans in Congress would be able to broadcast their own deal inducing message to the conservative base - the President wanted a clean resolution but we were able to extract concessions. If both sides can sell a deal, there is a deal.

3) Leadership

At a foundational level, this shutdown is the result of both Obama and Boehner's unwillingness to face down the rejectionist elements of their respective bases. In essence, instead of pursuing real leadership, the two men have played to narrow perceptions of leadership. Following on from my arguments in (1) and (2), were Obama and Boehner to take a stand in the center ground- resisting internal discord in their own parties, the American people would respond positively. It would make sense for Obama in the aftermath of his post-Syria credibility deficit and it also would make sense for Boehner - offering the Speaker a pre-2014 midterm expression of good faith negotiation.

Ultimately, the President and the Speaker must decide between two choices. Political posturing at the cost of continued shutdown suffering, or common sense engagement that serves the common interest.

Unhealthy logic - 3 conservative misconceptions regarding health care

Some domestic policy...

The GOP appears to have finalized its strategy to shut down ObamaCare. I'll comment on this plan in due course. 

In the interim, here are three thoughts on the anti-competitive character of America's health care system. Please note - I'm not writing this piece in defense of ObamaCare (which I believe will be a disaster), but rather as a challenge to those conservatives who insinuate that our current medical system is fit for purpose.

1) The Health Care Marketplace is fundamentally dysfunctional. 

For almost every treatment - from a scan to surgery, health care is far more expensive in America than in other western nations. In large part, this discrepancy is the consequence of absent consumer knowledge. More specifically, most Americans don't have a clue as to what a particular treatment should cost. In turn, this knowledge gap allows different hospitals to charge absurdly variable prices for the same procedures.

          This dynamic enables monopoly providers (see below) and it encourages an over-saturation of specialists. The marketplace dysfunction is topped off by the AMA's unscrutinized power to set treatment-value points.

2) Excessive Barriers to Entry

To practice in the US, a foreign trained doctor must navigate a bureaucratic minefield of epic proportions. This minefield obstructs the flow of otherwise available human capital. In shielding the US medical training industry from competition, it's also deeply counter-productive. Across America, there's a great need for rural doctors - foreign practitioners could fill these coverage gaps.

            Regrettably, our current health care system disincentivizes the very essence of good medical care - reliable access to affordable and effective care. At a further level, Doctor shortages contribute to local monopolies - forcing patients to pay excessive prices or travel excessive distances for alternate treatment. This is outrageous. The Federal Trade Commission should investigate the AMA for its evident restraint of trade.

3) Absent Personal Responsibility

With many Americans receiving their health care coverage from employer based plans, cost burdens are shifted onto society instead of individuals. As a result, there's little incentive for personal responsibility/cost awareness*. Until individuals are made to bear scrutiny to the health care choices that they make, health care costs will continue to grow.

           As I've argued before, conservatives must present a serious alternative to the looming debacle of ObamaCare.  Yet, we also need to re-consider whether our current health care system is as great as some of us assume.

*Albeit in an unintentional way, ObamaCare's corporate/personal mandates may actually help bring down health care costs over the long term. As companies offer grants instead of fixed insurance (to avoid carrying the weight of health care inflation), individuals will have to shop around more - eventually leading to greater consumer pressure for more affordable options.

GOP prospects in Midterms, Putin bored with Snowden, Peace in Burma and Colombia, Fmr. President HW Bush, Neptune's new Moon

1) Respected pollsters Nate Silver and Harry Enten are predicting that the GOP has an increasingly strong chance of re-capturing Congress in the 2014 midterms. However, there are risks here for the GOP. As the pollsters note, if the GOP picks odd candidates (as occurred in 2012), prospective electoral victories may implode. At the same time, even the very prospect of a GOP takeover carries problems. As more intransigent Republicans realize that victory is possible, their arrogance will likely grow. Believing that power shortly awaits, they'll increasingly oppose bi-partisan compromise. I'll be writing on this issue for The Week.
 

2) Putin is getting bored of Snowden. Though I dislike the Russian leader, in this particular case, I understand his pain. Snowden is an insufferable ego-maniac (I think he sees himself as a modern day Jesus- suffering the persecution of the powerful in order to bring salvation to the masses). I find Putin's discomfort interesting. I suspect that Snowden is refusing to play ball with the Russian intelligence services. As a result, his presence in Moscow is little more than a political liability for the Kremlin. From their perspective, he offers nothing but an angry American Government. Snowden will probably end up in Venezuela - another bastion of effective government. 

3) Burma has promised to release all political prisoners by the end of the year. Similarly, in Colombia, the FARC rebel force is finally bending to a peace process. From both states, this is very welcome news. The evolution of Burma from a brutal military regime into a graduated process of democratization is proceeding successfully. The rulers of this country have realized that detachment from the international community is a path to ruin. Comparatively, for FARC, the relentless pressure of the Colombian Government (primarily under former President Uribe) has been too much to bear. In short, they've been brought to their knees and then to the table. As outlined in Robert Kaplan's excellent book, Imperial Grunts, the United States (and especially the Bush Administration) deserves joined credit for this outcome.

4) The capture of Miguel Morales is a major milestone for the Mexican Government. The Zetas cartel are a particularly brutal organization. Hopefully this success will spur President Nieto to continue the work of his predecessor in confronting Mexican narco-terrorists. These gangsters are not resistance fighters or simple criminals, they're individuals who have no qualms about setting fire to casinos and in kidnapping, torturing and killing bus loads of civilians. They cannot be allowed to intimidate Mexico into submission.

5) Fmr. President George HW Bush was recognized at the White House yesterday. This decent man deserves the praise he received. He's a great American.

6) NASA just found out that Neptune has another Moon. It's tiny, but this latest news just provides yet more evidence to the case that I made last week - Space deserves our attention.

 

Syria, Debt Negotiations, Hezbollah, Russia, Piers Morgan

1) Syria

The defection by the head of Syria's Military Police to the rebels represents another step towards Assad's collapse. As I predicted a few weeks ago (I speak at - 10.32, 15.23, 22.25), defections will increase as momentum continues to root more firmly with the rebels.  While because of the sectarian make up of Assad's power base, certain elite units are unlikely to withdraw their support for the dictator, Assad's days are nonetheless numbered. He simply has insufficient financial, military and popular power to sustain against the rebel onslaught. The United States must exert increased pressure on Russia to end their support for his regime. We want to ensure that he departs Syria as quickly and bloodlessly as possible.

2) Debt Negotiations

President Obama's return to Washington is as much a political stunt as it is a gesture towards resolving the debt impasse. He should never have gone to Hawaii amidst such a serious financial crisis. Unless Obama is willing to offer Boehner serious entitlement reforms and unless Boehner offers Obama increased tax revenues, there will be no deal. Hopefully we can get some kind of short term deal to avoid the sequester cuts. With regards to defense, I have argued that these cuts would be catastrophic. A short term deal is far from ideal. However, perhaps the new Congress can act more seriously than its predecessor?

3) Hezbollah Christmas Message

Hezbollah's greeting to Christians illustrates the importance that the group places on the maintenance of a cross-sectarian support base. The organization seeks to maintain an image of a Shia liberator allied to the ambitions of ''the oppressed" across the Middle East - not just for Shia, but for all. The problem for Hezbollah is that by supporting Assad's continuing murder in Syria they have undercut this narrative. Ultimately, I still believe that Hezbollah will abandon Assad before the end. The truth is that Hezbollah is an extremist terrorist group dedicated to the assertion of an authoritarian and fundamentalist Shia theology. They might have a better PR strategy than Al Qa'ida, but their pretense of affinity for democracy is not real.

4) Russia

Putin's Russia offers the US no meaningful relationship. We must be much tougher on Putin. I will have an opinion piece on this issue in the coming days.

5) Piers Morgan

The deportation petition against Piers Morgan is stupid. He is lawfully present in the United States and he has the right to freedom of speech. True freedom of speech doesn't exist in the UK. We must ensure it continues to exist here.

Compromise for Country: How I would resolve our debt crisis

UPDATE= FOR 2013 UPDATE - CLICK HERE.

 Photo Credit: CBS News