I lay the blame for chronic legislative gridlock squarely at the feet of the effective ban on earmarks.
Without a tangible incentive to keep the a dialog open, opposing interests are eventually reduced to debating philosophy and shouting slogans at each other.
Given this circumstance, and enough time to rot and fester, we find ourselves in ideological camps, in a zero sum race to the bottom, with too few among us who can genuinely and moderately engage in mutually beneficial dialog to at least identify common ground in good faith.
There is no question that earmarks in their traditional practice could be problematic, as can most under-regulated monetary activity. But we threw the baby out with the bath water. The classic republican lawmaker strategy, of getting rid of something one doesn’t like, is by opposing or delaying regulation and reform, allowing it to rot and fester in willful, complacent neglect to become untenable on its’ own. And when republican lawmaker’s prey is at its’ weakest, only then will they embrace “reform,” but in name only, in an actual effort to dismantle, deregulate, hamstring, criminalize or privatize whatever public good that does not service their own financial interests, or worse, could pose future competition. It’s happening with public schools, with prisons, telecommunications, our public lands, our military, our post office, our drinking water, transportation infrastructure, labor unions, it’s happened with public housing just as sure as it happened with earmarks; and the charge against earmarks was led by John McCain.
President Obama’s most admirable political failing early on, was that he believes, as I do, that people are basically good, and frankly he gave his colleagues too much credit. Ironically, it was his very ability, to genuinely and moderately engage in mutually beneficial dialog in good faith, to identify common ground, that was used against him. In response to charges alleging intentions of “unbridled pork barrel spending,” he pledged during his campaign that he would veto, automatically, any legislation on his desk containing earmarks; republican lawmakers got what they wanted. I don’t know why they wanted it exactly, but what I do know is that most things that provide a public good, but do not serve to financially enrich republican lawmakers and their wealthier constituents, are to them, not worth preserving. It thus stands to reason, that republican lawmakers must somehow profit from nurturing lies and hatred to nourish ideologues and extremists, symptomatic of a lack of dialog, in turn symptomatic of legislative gridlock and political polarization, which amplify each other exponentially to a breaking point, as recent events have clearly demonstrated.
I am calling on our house, our senate and our president, in our soon to be united government, in addition to aggressively implementing solutions to the emergencies at hand, to also craft conciliatory tools to facilitate continued dialog long into the future, first with the formal restoration of earmarks.
I am not proposing that earmarks are a cure-all. In a newly defined, transparent and regulated form, I am proposing that earmarks are merely the lubricant we can use to get the machine running again, a solution to get everyone back to the negotiating table, and keep the dialog open, enabling us once again to continue our sacred duty, imperative to the survival of liberty, to work together to form a more perfect union.