Extreme Right-Wingers Holding Economy Hostage

Will Republican House leader John Boehner lose his position as Speaker of the House after he failed to muster enough Republican votes on Thursday night to pass his ‘Plan B’ remedy to the fiscal cliff crisis, which would have raised taxes on million-plus incomes and slashed many non-military government programs including safety nets?

That is the top question in the fallout surrounding the collapse of his negotiating strategy on Thursday, according to a round of Washington-based press reports, including this one from the conservative National Journal recounting how Boehner called Republicans to a late meeting, announced that the Plan B vote was not happening, and then recited the Serenity Prayer: “God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change.”

On Friday morning, Boehner held a brief press conference saying a Republicans cadre would not vote for a tax increase—no matter what. He then attacked the White House and Senate Democrats for not acceding to his chamber’s uncompromising right-wingers. He said “the Democrats continue to run Washington,” and suggested that the Senate could just vote on yesterday’s House-passed bill that only raised tax rates on millionaires and severely slashed non-military spending. Finally, he said Merry Christmas and left.  

Where does this leave the so-called fiscal cliff negotiations? Many pundits are saying that the Democrat’s negotiating hand has been strengthened and that the White House should put military cuts and ending corporate giveaways—like oil and gas subsidies—back on the table, while, of course removing anything that undermines retirement programs.

“It is easy to overreact to these things in the moment, to overread them,” wrote David Kurtz, Washington Bureau Chief of Talking Points Memo. “But Speaker Boehner just put it all on the line. The entire nation was watching, and he was exposed. He knows it. His conference knows it. Anyone left in Washington who had doubts about this speaker’s clout now knows it, too. In a parliamentary system, he would resign and his party would elect a new leader. We don’t do it that way here … usually.”

A Constitutional Crisis?

But it’s really anybody’s educated guess what will happen next. Beyond all the scenarios that will be filling the blogosphere and media today, the Speaker’s posturing for the past six weeks of negotiations with the White House highlight much deeper problems with American democracy—because, quite to the contrary of what Boehner said Friday, a small number of extreme right-wingers in the House are holding the entire federal government hostage and creating ripple effects in the economy. 

Washington’s inability to reach a budget deal—even a bad one from the progressive perspective—is also indicative of why we may not see progress on gun control, why we have not seen anything meaningful on climate change, on campaign finance reform, or on many of the issues that are most consequential. 

One has to ask if our supposedly infallible U.S. Constitution is failing Americans because our system cannot react to national emergencies—by virtue of dividing government into bodies that habitually say no or sidestep issues by genuflecting to near-term economic and political interests. The Balkinization blog has discussed this precise point.

There are different kinds of tyranny—not just the ‘tyranny of the majority,’ but also the temper tantrums and ‘tyranny of the minority’ that cannot accept results of a presidential election, cannot compromise, and cannot return to debate anew. Beyond correctly noting Boehner’s antics as utterly irresponsible, the U.S. is facing a constitutional belwether.

America has never been a nation without political divisions. There certainly have been times when the Constitution’s intentional go-slow structuring of the three branches of government has prevented mob rule. But there also have been moments where presidents have lead—and achieved significant change—or begun that process. Will Obama find a way through today’s gridlock that we haven’t see so far?     

The obstacles are everywhere. The political system and partisan divides do not bode well for big change or quick responses. One wonders if the very nature of our political system means we are fated to live with a less-perfect union every time there’s no consensus—the new normal—whether children’s lives are the cost or another issue takes hold.

Maybe, as the Mayan calendar makers apparently knew eons ago, we indeed are at the end of an era and the start of another one.

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. AlterNet’s journalists work tirelessly to counter the traditional corporate media narrative. We’re here seven days a week, 365 days a year. And we’re proud to say that we’ve been bringing you the real, unfiltered news for 20 years—longer than any other progressive news site on the Internet.

It’s through the generosity of our supporters that we’re able to share with you all the underreported news you need to know. Independent journalism is increasingly imperiled; ads alone can’t pay our bills. AlterNet counts on readers like you to support our coverage. Did you enjoy content from David Cay Johnston, Common Dreams, Raw Story and Robert Reich? Opinion from Salon and Jim Hightower? Analysis by The Conversation? Then join the hundreds of readers who have supported AlterNet this year.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure AlterNet remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to AlterNet, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

DonateDonate by credit card


Thanks for your support!

Did you enjoy AlterNet this year? Join us! We're offering AlterNet ad-free for 15% off - just $2 per week. From now until March 15th.