We were going to write a piece this morning about how the cowardice and dysfunction that is rampant in our federal government reared its ugly head in the vote on background checks. We were going to write about how this popular president was unable to persuade not only his opponents but his supporters to stand against the gun lobby and vote for legislation that was supported by 90% of the American people.
We had it all planned out in our head.
And then New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd wrote an op-ed that says it so much better than we ever could.
In a recent op-ed titled “No Bully in the Pulpit” Dowd makes the point that this president continues erroneously believe that he can use rhetoric and emotion to persuade congress to do his bidding. But as Dowd notes: “That’s not how adults with power respond to things.”
Make no mistake; the president can be very, very effective in using his soaring oratory to motivate the masses. We all remember his call to action during the State of the Union address when he called for an up or down vote on gun control legislation: “The people of Newtown deserve a vote. Gabby Giffords deserves a vote…” And we could feel his pain, and anger, as he stood with the Newtown parents and chastised the Senate for their “shameful actions” in failing to pass common sense background checks on all gun purchases. He fails to understand that while his eloquence may motivate the nation it has little or no impact on congress.
He, like many eloquent speakers before him, mistakenly believes that the speech itself marks the beginning and the end of the argument.
We thought that the president had learned this lesson. In a 60 Minute interview held after the election the president admitted that his biggest mistake in his first term was: “believing that getting the policy right was enough.” He admitted that he had not understood “the importance of selling it.” He has taken to the stump to successfully sell his agenda to the people. But that effort has yet to prove effective in moving congress.
There is little doubt that this president is never going to move his Republican opponents to join his side of an argument. But surely he should be able to control his own Democratic caucus. Sadly four Democrats joined with Republicans in cowing to the gun lobby.
Dowd lays out her case for how the president should have reached out to those senators straddling the fence on gun control. She suggests the president use a light hand on the reins: “How can we make this a bill that you can vote for and defend? You work with us, we’ll work with you.”
We would suggest a different tack: “If you break ranks on this I will see to it that you are “primaried” in the next election. I will veto any piece of legislation that you support. I will make your days here in the Senate a living hell and I will see to it that this term in office will be your last.”
Too harsh? Perhaps! But in 2007 and 2008 George W. Bush got everything he wanted from congress even though he had an approval rating in the low 30’s and Nancy Pelosi as minority leader. Why? Because they knew that if they crossed him, be they Republican or Democrat, he would beat them up come election time.
The Senate is a dysfunctional mess. It takes 60 votes to get anything done. If today’s senate were in power in the 1960’s civil rights legislation would be little more than a pipedream.
The president continues to use a velvet glove when a firm hand is required. He has yet to learn that in leadership it is often more effective to be feared and respected than liked.
This congress does not fear him.
Check out Maureen Dowd’s op-ed online in the New York Times.
No comments:
Post a Comment