|
Can things get done when both parties have some say? Let's see ...
Reagan had Democrats running congress. Clinton had Newt Gingrich and the republicans in control of the house. Gingrich passed the "balanced" budget that Clinton fans never stop talking about.
So for those presidents, the need to compromise and work worth the other side was no excuse.
Obama's party controlled the house, the senate, and the presidency for two years and the result was complete fail, so recent history suggests that divided government is the most effective.
Perhaps because you get the strengths of both sides - the liberals insist on changing something to try improve it, trying new things, while the conservatives ensure that they don't throw the baby out with the bathwater and that the numbers add up. Maybe it's kind of like forcing a programer and a graphic artist to work with each other on a site. Left to himself, the programmer would deliver a very plain black and white text site that works. The artist designer would use Photoshop to deliver a picture of a nice looking site. Have them work together and you get an attractive site that actually works.
Come to think of it, that may be a perfect analogy. Democrats are good at inspiring people, like artists do, but they rarely talk numbers, nor the science of economics. On the other hand a republican like Newt isn't the least bit inspiring, but he's a phD who knows some of the science and led the process of actually passing a "balanced" budget.
(The Clinton-Gingrich budget put us $200 billion in debt, but that's "balanced" by Washington math.)
__________________
For historical display only. This information is not current:
support@bettercgi.com ICQ 7208627
Strongbox - The next generation in site security
Throttlebox - The next generation in bandwidth control
Clonebox - Backup and disaster recovery on steroids
|