Wednesday, October 21, 2015

Ryan and Biden Takes Two Steps Toward Orderly Government

Two steps toward orderly government were taken today.

Vice-President Biden, after contemplating the presidential nomination, stepped back.  He was the last serious challenger to Hillary Clinton.  Senator Sanders will, no doubt, keep raising issues for months, but it now seems all but certain that the Democratic Party will unite behind Secretary Clinton.  One party, at least, seems to be set on a path to a serious, governing-oriented candidate.  

The even bigger news is the Paul Ryan has offered to become Speaker of the House - if the Tea Party agrees to unite with the Republicans to work toward governing.  This will be bigger news, I should say, if the Tea Party actually agrees to these terms.  Nonetheless, I appreciate Congressman Ryan's willingness to take on the heavy job of making the House into a governing body again.


Mac said...

You wrote:

“One party, at least, seems to be set on a path to a serious, governing-oriented candidate. . ..

. . . Nonetheless, I appreciate Congressman Ryan's willingness to take on the heavy job of making the House into a governing body again.”

It is certainly a good thing if Paul Ryan can restore some order to the Republican caucus, but I fear that the so-called post-Watergate reforms in the Congress which destroyed Party discipline cannot be reversed. Someone on NPR today said “Sam Rayburn must be spinning in his grave.” No doubt. He came from a long line of strong Speakers whose strength came from the seniority system and the ability of the leadership to banish dissenters to the back benches, never to be heard from again.

But you have hit on the real problem in the two sentences quoted above.

First, the Democrat Party crown princess is a “government-oriented” candidate. Her Party lives by the governing philosophy that there is no problem that ought to be ignored and every problem needs more government to resolve it. That is why we have a bloated bureaucracy that sees problems as something to be continued so as to maintain the bureaucracy rather than something to be solved for the good of the people and the Nation.

Second, you assume facts not in evidence. You suggest that the House is not now a governing body. Nothing could be further from the truth. Governing is not limited to taking action. Often, the best government is evidenced when the legislature refrains from taking action. That is the beauty of our Constitution and its system of checks and balances. In order for the central government to intrude upon the people’s liberty, elected majorities in both houses must take action and the President must concur. If one duly-elected house—or the President—cannot be convinced that action is needed, the best government is one that refrains from acting.

As Thomas Jefferson observed,

"An elective despotism was not the government we fought for, but one which should not only be founded on true free principles, but in which the powers of government should be so divided and balanced among general bodies of magistracy, as that no one could transcend their legal limits without being effectually checked and restrained by the others."

Notes on Va., 1782.

Gruntled said...

Democratic Party, please.

Mac said...

They don't call themselves "Democratics". They are Democrats and their Party is the Party of the Democrats, just as the Republican Party is the Party of Republicans. And there is nothing particularly "democratic" about them. (I was raised in a family of rabidly yellow dog Democrats and know of what I speak.) You, of course, remain free to call them whatever you like.

Mac said...

In 1964, when I went door-to-door for Barry Goldwater in Madison County, Illinois, Mom said, "Oh, please don't work for that man. You'll end up in Vietnam." In 1968, she was proven right. My Mother often said "The Democrats could nominate a jackass and I would vote for him." In 1972, I was stationed in the Philippines. After the general election, I wrote a two sentence letter to Mom: "Well, they did. Did you?" Her one word reply was "Yes!" It was a loving home where there was a free exchange of ideas, and it sparked in me a life-long love of the game of politics. I just wish most of the current practitioners of the game had a sound understanding of American history, rather than the bread and circuses mentality of the "Democratic" Party.