Thank you for continuing to share these messages with your friends, if you are not already on our mailing list, please click here to be added to our list. You can also follow me on Facebook. The more people we can reach, the more we contribute to this growing movement. We share these posts on our blog, A Path Forward to November 3, 2020, every two weeks, which means there will be a total of 100 missives before the Presidential election of 2020, in which our country will select a whole new course.
Long before Donald Trump came into our world via escalator, political compromise was referred to by its practitioners as an “art”. Two or more sides would recognize and resolve an impasse. Each would give up something, and get something. Neither would be entirely comfortable with the resolution, and both would be able to claim that they achieved an outcome that prior to the compromise seemed highly unlikely.
This still happens in our nation’s capital, every week and on issues large and small. And for the most part, it should happen. However, the differences between what transpired in the recent budget discussions and what is commonplace when compromises are sought are even more striking:
- When the price of resolution includes avoiding a governmental shutdown the debate will no longer be limited to the issues that were initially under review, which were DACA and border security. Instead the debate reached a wider, more complicating sphere related to the broader infliction of pain on the government and country as the consequence of failing to act on DACA. It was not unwise for Senator Schumer and the Senate Democrats to initially refuse to supply the votes necessary to keep the government open, because they traded their inevitable wounds for a clearer path to the conceivable creation of a future for Dreamers. Once the Republicans had already acceded to the six-year extension of the Children’s Health Insurance Program within the budget resolution, the high pain/gain ratio for Democrats of shutting down the government even temporarily was predictable. The politics were messy and a bit disappointing, but it was worth it. There will be no ongoing damage, and tactical lessons have been learned.
- In typical negotiations that lead to political compromise, everyone comes into the room with a similar body of knowledge. On the issues before them, Democratic and Republican Senators had varying interpretations on the current effectiveness of border security, or different value judgements on injustices faced by the Dreamers. But, each and every one of them had a deeper understanding of these matters than did Donald Trump. When it looked for a moment like Trump would agree with Republican Lindsay Graham and Democrat Dick Durbin on a “clean” DACA bill, aide Steven Miller marshalled the Fox forces. Because Trump can veto bills, Mitch McConnell has to treat his views as consequential. The combination of Trump not being any kind of a learner and Fox having his ear is very difficult to deal with. With Trump, any deal will become in-artful.
The first question is how badly does each side want its objective in a sought compromise? Republicans know how fervently most Democrats want to do the right thing for the Dreamers, while many Republicans would be comfortable with no DACA at all. That’s why what once seemed unthinkable may well come to pass, where Democrats will trade Dreamer protection for the votes Trump needs to get a major section of the wall funded. (Democrats also know that they will have much improved ability to block wall spending after they take back the House in November. Like Rome, walls aren’t built in a day.) Similarly, if the Republicans had needed 60 votes for the bad tax bill in the Senate, Schumer would have been able to extract major concessions, because he would have been fine if discussions fell apart and there was no bill at all.
The second question is does the objective have to be passed, or just blocked? If Trump ever proposes an infrastructure bill, it will require McConnell and him to make major concessions with Schumer and Senate Democrats, because he would need all new legislation, and 60 votes to cut off debate. There is no national groundswell convincing Schumer that he would be in peril if he disagrees with Trump’s approach.
The third question is to what extent is there common ground between the parties? The requirement that 60 votes are necessary in the Senate to cut off debate changes the role of Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski and Jeff Flake and Lindsay Graham from providing a key necessary NO vote (which they did rarely to be sure). Now to be successful they must bring Republicans into a “moderate” coalition, a role which they will find much more enjoyable. This will also enhance the role of the more centrist Democratic Senators, which was described in missive #31.
Here are three things we can do to make sure the resistance isn’t compromised by compromises in Congress:
| 1) Promote the Promise of the Common-Sense Coalition | |
 |
Any time a group of Senators from both parties labels itself a Common-Sense Coalition, it’s time to be wary. The danger of any centrist coalition is that it can blunt necessary advocacy and substitute half a loaf when a loaf is needed. But in 2018 the emergence of this coalition will prove more valuable to Democrats than Republicans. That’s because the Democrats are in the minority, and thus are that much more in need in terms of coalition building. Three weeks from now we will be enveloped in a DACA debate, with all of the complications of the budget resolution set aside. For at least a day, attention will be paid to the substance --- who would be deported if DACA doesn’t survive in a meaningful form; the contributions they make to America; and the injustices that will be visited upon them. By participating in the recent meetings of the Common-Sense coalition, certain Republican Senators have revealed themselves as possible supporters of a DACA bill. They need a note from you thanking them for working across the aisle and looking for solutions. Give them some positive re-enforcement, even though the real work is yet to be done. Choose any or all of these three, who are definitely not used to getting such notes: Mike Rounds of South Dakota |
2) Delay the Usual Internecine Democratic Warfare |
|
 |
There always will be and always should be a place within the Democratic Party for Democrats to battle Democrats. Fighting passionately over what you stand for is how you end up standing for something. So, the disappointment of some that Schumer and colleagues agreed to end the shutdown could easily end up within the normal bounds of discourse. However, let’s get the situation clear in our minds. Schumer got something that was meaningful, and he was not in a position that DACA gains were going to emerge in full bloom with each successive day of a shutdown. Further, the moderate Democrats who were eager to have the shutdown be over all stood tall by Schumer’s side through all of the Affordable Care Act votes and all of the votes on tax “reform”. Under considerable pressure and from states who strongly supported Trump over Clinton, they will continue to be strong members of the Democratic caucus. We can all be monitors of this internal debate, to make certain that our resistance has both standards and a big tent. Or we can seek to eviscerate our own. Stephanie Taylor of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee wrote: "Today's cave is also a wake up call for the Democratic Party. Today's cave was led by weak-kneed, right-of-center Democrats who buckled as soon as the fight was on. Senator Schumer voted with Republicans and called this a good path forward. This is exactly why voters don't know what Democrats stand for. Weak Democrats muddy the party brand -- and today, they made it harder to inspire voters and win elections everywhere in 2018."Write Stephanie Taylor at info@boldprogressives.org and tell her what she already knows --- Schumer is not a “weak kneed right of center Democrat”. Schumer ultimately told Joe Manchin and Claire McCaskill that he didn’t need them in the effort to withhold 40 votes, which helped them in their home states where they are seeking re-election in November. He ultimately decided he did not have an immediate path to DACA victory. That’s what you want a Democratic caucus chair to do. |
3) Help the Coalition for the American Dream and United We Dream Get Momentum |
|
 |
Even though battle lines are now well drawn, it’s not too late to get a little bit more momentum behind the forces that are working to protect Dreamers. One of the communities of interest that has been surprisingly helpful (within their own self-interest) is America’s corporate, labor and trade association leaders. Figure out a way to get attention for their efforts. Write to a corporate, labor or trade association leader you know and ask them to join the growing ranks. Send their letter to Congress to your own member of Congress with an attached note. Or, get behind the spirited, intensive lobbying effort of the largest group of immigrant youth in the country. Click to donate here. |
Because of the need for the bills to get 60 votes in the Senate, we’re heading toward a year where compromises will always be at the table. Since Donald Trump always has Fox TV tuned in and since he has almost no knowledge of policy issues, he will never be a presidential negotiator even at the lower end, represented by the days of James Buchanan and Warren G. Harding. That will make things a bit more tumultuous. We will have to expect our elected officials to pick their way through carefully, and we will have to get beyond the declared wisdom of one paragraph posts.
Through it all, with determination and confidence and energy and hope, we are working toward the wonders that can emerge on November 6, 2018.
David Harrison
Bainbridge Island, Washington
No comments:
Post a Comment