How to survive the next nine years of hell
by David Atkins
It should be obvious by now that the Republican Party and the American conservative movement at large are incapable of introspection. Greg Sargent makes that perfectly clear in his examination of the Ryan budget, a document of such immorality that only true libertarian ideologues wouldn't be repulsed by it. The Ryan budget slashes Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and all sorts of other crucial supports for the poor and middle class. Meanwhile, it gives even bigger tax and other financial advantages to the wealthy than even Mitt Romney had proposed.
Sargent also points out the obvious: that the American people just finished litigating these very issues in a hard-fought election that pitted a slightly left-of-center agenda against libertarian plutocracy. Libertarian plutocracy lost. Paul Ryan lost. Republican Senators lost. And yes, Republicans would have lost the House as well but for particularly devious gerrymandering.
Republicans also know that the country isn't getting any closer to their worldview. The country is moving away from it. So why keep on pressing?
The simplest answer is that there are still enough Americans who either 1) believe wholesale in the religion of Objectivism, or 2) are possessed of such racial resentment and ignorance that they believe the reason for their lack of jobs and wage growth is the fault of some brown person somewhere getting their tax dollars, or 3) believe that Republican Jesus is coming back any time now to smite the various constituencies who don't adhere to their peculiar institutions of provincial American traditionalism. There are enough of these people to control the Republican primary process, and Republican politicians not running for President couldn't care less about the rest of the country.
They also know that because of gerrymandering, the likelihood of their losing the House of Representatives anytime between now and the year 2022 is slim. At worst they may lose the gavel by a few seats, but with more than enough pliable Blue Dogs and New Democrats to carry along their radical agenda.
Finally, it's important to understand just what Sargent says. These people are ideologues through and through:
If you want a safety net, you need to pay for it. Republicans would prefer to roll it back — even as they deeply cut taxes on the rich. All of this slashing of government would take place amid a fragile recovery — which is justified by grotesquely hyping the immediate threat posed by long term debt.
The most charitable reading of this blueprint is that its authors actually believe all of this is good policy. And indeed, it reflects a set of views many Republicans have long espoused in various forms: Rolling back government programs poor people rely on is good for them, unshackling the “takers” from dependence and freeing them to exercise the economic liberty that will enable them to prosper. Government throws a wet blanket on individual initiative and is more likely to discourage, rather than enable, social mobility. Asking a little more from the “makers” and “job creators” to expand protections for the poor and elderly and invest in education and infrastructure will create economic stagnation, while reducing their tax rates will unleash explosive growth.
The election was just fought around all these ideas, and the American people rejected them decisively. Yet many Republicans remain fully in thrall to them. No amount of candy or flowers can win these folks over.
It's not going to get better. Republicans will retreat somewhat on the social issues that are killing them worst in the polls: guns, gays, overt discrimination against women, and immigration reform. But on the core economics they'll only double down on the extremism all the way until 2022.
So what should Democrats do?
First and foremost, Democrats should relentlessly hammer Republicans on their unpopular positions while taking popular stands themselves. They should point out consistently their own willingness to compromise with Republicans if Republicans will come forward with remotely acceptable policies. But that's just the politics preventing a Republican takeover of the entire federal government apparatus in 2016 and 2020.
But the country cannot effectively survive nine more years of crisis budgeting every few months. The country cannot tolerate the near shutdown of the government by record automatic filibusters.
Structural changes to the fundamental running of the country are necessary. Abolishing the debt ceiling is one. Moving to a two-year budget cycle is another. Switching to a talking filibuster is a third. There are many others as well, including the elimination or bypassing of the electoral college, implementation of disclosure laws for campaign contributions, and creation of national non-partisan redistricting.
These and other dull but crucial changes will be necessary in order to keep the country limping forward until 2022, when the country will finally have a chance to be rid of the Objectivist cult as a major political force once and for all.
.