6 March 2018 — 1707 mst
Democrats’ caving to Republicans is not bipartisanship
It’s just a cave-in to the Republican position, camouflaged in the rhetoric of pious centrists for whom compromise, or the mirage of compromise, is an intrinsic, not an instrumental, good. In the classic sense:
Bipartisan is a term which denotes support by members of the two major political parties (the Democrats and the Republicans). In a two-party system, it refers to any bill, act, resolution, or any other action of a political body in which both of the major political parties are in agreement. Often, compromises are called bipartisan if they reconcile the desires of both parties from an original version of legislation or other proposal.
Bipartisanship can also be between two or more opposite groups to agree and determine a plan of action on an urgent matter that is of great importance to their voters.
Bipartisanship exists when both major parties agree on an issue. It does not exist when a few opportunists defect from their party and vote against its position on an issue. A defection is a cave-in, not a compromise. It’s a reach across the aisle that produces not a handshake on splitting the difference, but a pull into the opposition’s pew.
That’s what’s happening now on the Republican bill to gut the Dodd-Frank law that protects Americans from the reckless greed of big banks; the reckless greed underlying the Great Recession. A dozen or so Democrats in the U.S. Senate, Montana’s Jon Tester among them (Tester’s one of the ringleaders), are working with the Republican senators who are carrying water for the big banks.
“Why,” asked the Roosevelt Institute’s Mike Konczal in today’s NY Times, “would some Democrats provide support for a rollback of Dodd-Frank?”
Proponents argue that this bill provides much needed relief for community banks and credit unions, which, these proponents claim, face enormous difficulties. They also say that it doesn’t endanger financial reforms aimed against the largest and most dangerous players.
Tester claims he’s helping community banks. Konczal disagrees:
But that view is mistaken: This bill goes far beyond the health of community banks and credit unions. It removes protections for 25 of the top 38 banks; weakens regulations on the biggest players and encourages them to manipulate regulations for their benefit; and saps consumer protections.
At Vox, Matt Yglesias is just as skeptical and much less charitable in his The 17 Democrats selling out on bank regulation is worse than it looks:
And though it’s very hard for Democrats to influence this sort of thing while the GOP holds a monopoly on power in Washington, the bank bill would be a golden opportunity to exert some influence. But they haven’t done it. The dozen moderates voting for the legislation aren’t striking a deal with the GOP to get something done. They’re giving away the store.
And while it’s nice that the party leadership is formally opposed to the legislation, it’s clear enough that you wouldn’t see defections on this scale — including critical ones from senators representing blue states — if leaders really wanted to block it. It’s an abdication of responsibility, and it’s appalling.
Although the defectors allege they’re simply trying to protect mainstream banks from onerous regulations, they’re also trying to position themselves as centrists whose “moderation” brings people together and proves that government can function when legislators of good will agree to work together. As Politico reports:
For the bill’s supporters, the legislation is a chance to show voters that it’s still possible to get things done in an often paralyzed Congress. They include at least 12 Democrats, several of whom face tough reelection campaigns in states that President Donald Trump won in 2016.
“I hope that our bipartisan work can rub off on the rest of Congress so we can break through the partisan gridlock that has plagued Washington for too long,” said Sen. Jon Tester of Montana, one of the Democrats who has negotiated the bill.
Members of the church of High Broderism, longing for a return to the days of everyone working together and meeting in the middle that never existed, love hearing that rhetoric. They have little trouble deluding themselves that crass defection is noble bipartisanship.
But when I hear a Democrat running for re-election praising bipartisanship, I know he’s trying to perfume a vote that will reek of a cave-in masquerading as common ground.