Democrats, the Party of Rugged Noncomformist Adults

posted at 10:03 am on March 19, 2010 by Howard Portnoy
[ Congress ]   

“If Johnny jumps off a bridge, are you going to do it, too?” When I was growing up, this question, whose clear underlying intent was to reinforce the importance of critical thinking and sound decision making, was asked at one time or another of every child by his parent. Usually, it was in response to the protest “But Johnny is doing it”—it being something ill-advised, if not downright criminal.

As Democrats close in on unilateral passage of the most sweeping piece of social legislation in a generation, their main defense in using ill-advised, if not criminal, tactics like the Slaughter rule and  nuclear option is that the Republicans did it. This mantra has also been picked up members of the mainstream media. It is nothing new for the current crop of Democrats and their minions in the press. The same argument was used to defend the misguided decision to try KSM and Company in a civilian court, before that idea was recognized as profoundly stupid and wisely bagged.

Then as now, of course, the Democrats are missing the point badly. Yes, terrorists were tried in civilian courts under the Bush administration, but that is only because the apparatus for trying them before military tribunals was still in the development stages. In the same vein, yes, Republicans have used seemingly underhanded tactics like reconciliation to force through their own agenda. But—big but—never for anything of the magnitude of the Obama health care initiative and never when public opposition was as intense and ubiquitous as it is currently.

But let’s suppose for the sake of argument that the Republicans had used the nuclear option to pass legislation that usupred a sixth of the economy, placing it in the hands of the federal government. How in the minds of Democrats does that justify repeating that mistake?

If the Democrats succeed in forcing their will on the American people in a (one hopes) futile attempt to salvage the Obama presidency—and it appears at this juncture that they might—the cost to them as a party and to current individual members will be staggering. Idaho Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter has already drawn a line in the sand, signing a measure requiring his attorney general to sue Congress if it passes health reforms that force residents to buy insurance. Similar legislation is pending in 37 other states. Republicans in Congress have been fairly up front in their plans to contest both the process and elements of the bill on the grounds of their dubious constitutionality.

In sum, Democrats run the risk not only of losing their control of the House but of passing into law a piece of legislation that will ultimately be repealed. The fact that its repeal will demand painfully long and Herculean efforts will only further enrage the American electorate and alienate them from the Democrats in the future.

I just wonder if somewhere in the ranks of the Democrats there isn’t a single adult who can function as surrogate parent and ask Pelosi, Reed, and the others what they hope to accomplish by following the Repbulicans over the side of the bridge.

Blowback