Splitting the Difference

This is Andrew Sullivan's email of the day:

You claim in your blog that 'It looks increasingly as if anyone who
cares about fiscal sanity is going to have to sit this election out.'
However, isn't it obvious that the only way to impose some sort of
fiscal sanity is to vote Kerry -- resulting in a split government that
can't reach any sort of agreement as to how to spend money?
Additionally, if we are going to spend money like drunken sailors
wouldn't we rather have Kerry, who will at least tax the baby-boomer
generation that is benefitting from all this spending, instead of Bush
who wants to run up huge deficits and force these problems on future
generations... people like ME?
As an uncatered to libertarian in my twenties, I think the answers to
both of these questions are 'yes' and 'yes'. I intend to vote
Republican except for President, where I intend to vote a big fat 'D'.
Then I'll sit back and pray for government gridlock.
I think this guy is right. If you take seriously the fact that this
country is headed toward fiscal catastrophe in the next decade, then
restraining spending and raising some taxes in the next four years is
almost as essential as tackling the entitlement crunch. Neither Bush
nor Kerry wants to help. They're both cowards (although Kerry seems to
have a better grip on fiscal reality than Bush does). So gridlock is
the best option. The combination of Bill Clinton and a Republican
Congress was great for the country's fiscal standing. Independents and
anyone under 40 concerned with the deficit don't need a Perot. They
just need to vote for Kerry and hope the GOP retains control of at
least one half of Congress.

First of all, the fact that this is Andrew
Sullivan's email of the day is significant in and of itself. One of
George Bush's most argent supporters seems to have come almost full
circle. If THIS guy
can come around to Kerry, anyone can.
Secondly, this seems to echo what I've been feeling recently. I suspect
one of the greatest things about the Clinton era was the fact that
there was a split government. The deadlock created between a Republican
congress and a Democratic presidency allowed the country to expand on
it's own accord. Clinton and Newt had to play nice so that things could
get done (need I mention the month-long federal shutdown in '95?).
There was absolutely no chance of either party pushing an extremist
agenda through the process.
In contrast, take a look at how things are right now. The Bush Cabal
has managed to pass almost every single thing they've asked for, and he
hasn't disagreed with Congress once. W has yet to veto a single bill
from the Republican congress.
It seems like the system of checks and balances outlined in the
Constitution is simply not enough. We need some kind of insurance
policy so that we don't wind up with a small group of people dictating
policy across the board. Just imagine how things would be right now if
there were even one more additional conservative on the Supreme Court.
Four short years could easily be enough to do irretrievable damage to
the country.
I'll be absolutely thrilled if Kerry wins the election. We don't need
anymore laws or amendments or wars. Let the politicians get back to
impeaching each other and let Americans get back to enjoying their
lives in freedom.

Posted by flow Frazao on March 3, 2004 at 10:16 PM | Permalink