Leading the Blame Game

Following the stand-off over raising the debt ceiling, it was inevitable partisan fingers would be drawn and pointed threateningly in every other direction. From lack of leadership to childish tantrums, there is no lack of scapegoat choices. With the benefit of hindsight, I find there is plenty of blame to go around:

• Obama

The golf course agreement with Boehner was an historic framework. Republicans could claim victory justify holding the debt ceiling hostage for the first time in history. Obama relied on the oral pact too much and exited the talks prematurely. Chastising Boehner publicly didn’t help. It ramped up emotions and spurred the ratings guys to “harumph.” He did, however, continue to lead most of his party to the trough to drink the poison throughout.

• Boehner:

Like Obama, he overestimated his strength within his party. Once he left their negotiation where he promised votes too soon, he did a public about-face leaving Obama dangling after convincing Pelosi, Reid & others to swallow hard & vote yes to cuts. Instead of selling his party on the gains made, he let them instruct him at the cost of his own political capital along with Obama, who lashed out at the podium.

• Democrats in the House:

While they followed their leader dutifully, once they realized they weren’t getting anywhere with the group of intransigent Republicans, several of them publicly said Obama should invoke the 14th Amendment, essentially advocating for the Executive Branch to pre-empt the Legislative Branch’s authority. Once again, it put Obama in an awkward position, but he did not bite. The ratings guys, however, were taking note that despite the proposed agreements rolling around, everyone was saying there was no way they could vote for any of them. Hmm…

• Republicans in the House:

You’ll note I don’t separate out the “Tea Party.” That’s because they are part of the Republican Party. That is why there is a Republican Speaker of the House. Were there an actual Tea Party, Pelosi would still be Speaker. The deal floated by Boehner & Obama was absolutely a victory for Republicans. They got him to back off a return to previous tax rates for any brackets AND to focus on tax reform by cutting loopholes including traditionally liberal ones AND to put Medicare—along with defense, arguably the program with the biggest monetary demand—Social Security, etc, on the table.

Instead of a victory on which they could stake their budgetary fight next year on, they believe their constituency is too dim-witted to figure out why they allowed those loopholes to be closed. Even though it should not matter since Nordquist’s Pledge is not part of their Oath of Office, they still had a valid argument they did not raise taxes.

They reminded me of Peter Griffin haggling:
“How much?”
“10″
“I’ll give you $8.”
“Alright”
“9”
“Ok!”
“10”
“Alright!”
“11”

• S&P:

Please. This group just lowered Freddy & Fannie to AA+ also, but they couldn’t figure that out in 2008? While the indecision in DC is enough to give the average investor heartburn or cardiac arrest, a ratings company is supposed to ONLY pay attention to the bottom line as they are only one part of the decision to offer credit. Their’s should be apolitical and solely focused on accounting practices, spending and revenue. The $2.1 trillion error they made that failed to reverse their decision proves they considered the political partisanship. Well, that and the fact they actually STATED political infighting as their reason. We’re not dealing with an unstable government on the verge of a coup. We’re talking about a history of political posturing. Looks like somebody is in need of some attention here.

• In the final analysis, each party was too fearful. They continue to point toward each other because self-interest & short-term thinking continues to rule the day.

Nobody cares what happens to the guy laid off after 25 years on a job that pays enough to make it paycheck to paycheck. Or to his elderly mom, who just buried her WW2 veteran husband, whose pension was lost when the company that promised a decent retirement after 40 years of service failed to fund that retirement in profitable times. Or to her grandson, who has a great idea for a business that could provide small generators capable of powering individual homes fueled by local resources. Too bad he can’t get a loan after finishing college because the banks we bailed out consider him and his concept too great of a risk since they need to maintain a higher level of funds on hand.

As a leader, Boehner should have cracked the whip for a few days instead of a few hours to bring his party to heal. He told the President he could get the votes within his party & did not.

The S&P should just stay out of our internal affairs and pay attention to the numbers.

Republicans need to get their act together if they’re going to be a reliable party in negotiations. That, or the fractious far right needs to form a 3rd party and not act as one caucus. Either way, learn when a victory presents itself if “victory” is indeed defined as “productive for the American people” and not a loss for your opponent you can rub his face in.

I’ll give the House Democrats a pass this time because while I believed at the time waving the 14th Amendment was synonymous to capitulation, I now believe Obama should have used it. Why? Because then there would be no doubt now & going forward that an American President would ever allow a default.

Sure, we might experience impeachment proceedings with perhaps the US’ 3rd ever, but it would get the one for this century out of the way! He has a strong argument for mitigating circumstances anyway with no interns involved.

Putting his neck on the line to say “Enough! I am not going to let childish tantrums risk the fragile recovery we are in. There are too many real people counting on it.”

Now that’s leadership.