The Wrongologist

The Wrongologist does not like to post opinions only, preferring to add fact
and data. However, I have copied below an opinion from the Health Affairs blog.
 James Capretta says some things about moral courage that I did
not consider regarding the failure of the super committee:

“In theory at least, it had immense and
unprecedented power.  If the select committee had been able to produce a
consensus plan on deficit reduction, that legislation would have been
guaranteed an up or down vote in the House and Senate — with no amendments
allowed from the other duly elected members of either body.  No corner of
the federal budget was beyond its potential reach.  It had the power to
change tax laws, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and every other program too. 
And once the committee settled on a deficit-cutting plan, the super committee’s
recommendations would have been rushed to the House and Senate floors for
votes, with just one month separating the deadline for committee action from
the final votes in Congress.  That would have made it very difficult for
opponents of the plan to get organized and stop it. In sum, the super
committee was twelve members with the power to literally rewrite U.S. fiscal
policy from top to bottom  — all in one piece of highly privileged
legislation.

All that was needed to unlock this unusual
concentration of power was seven votes.  The debt ceiling legislation
which created the super committee stipulated that seven of the twelve committee
members had to agree to a deficit reduction plan before it could be
“fast-tracked” in the House and Senate.  It further stipulated that the
twelve super committee members would be appointed by the respective House and
Senate party leaders (with three appointments coming from each).  This
meant that the committee would have six Democrats and six Republican members,
and that the seven-vote requirement would preclude the committee from advancing
any proposal that did not have some level of bipartisan support behind it.

Of course, in the end, that proved to be a bridge
too far…”

So, What’s Wrong?

While the Wrongologist had zero expectations that ANY productive outcome
would ensue, this post highlights an astonishing fact that he had not
considered: Not one in six Democrats, or one in six Republicans was willing to
cross his party line even when a fast-track, no filibuster opportunity to remake
American domestic policy is dangled in front of them. I know that
passing bipartisan legislation is not why most members of Congress are in
Washington. If it were otherwise, then the legislative outcome would reflect
it.

Moral leadership?  Do we have the
right to expect that just 7 of 12 could form a common view? That just one in 12 could do something that in 2011, would be considered incredibly brave?

If just one of them had acted with moral courage, we could count that as
something to be thankful for on this Thanksgiving day. 

Still NOBODY could think (or act) beyond their assigned ideology. In truth,
we all knew no one would.

Hoping for a happy and safe Thanksgiving for all.