Getty Images
In the fall of 2009, at the height of the debate over health care reform, it was not uncommon for Senate Republicans to lament Ted Kennedy's demise. It's not that GOP lawmakers agreed with the Liberal Lion on the substance; it's that Republicans looked at Kennedy as a senator who knew how to reach bipartisan compromises.
I distinctly remember watching Sen. Orrin Hatch in late August 2009 appearing on one of the Sunday shows, saying in reference to the legendary Massachusetts Democrat, "If he was here, I don't think we'd be in the mess we're in right now."
Even at the time, it was an odd sentiment. Kennedy may have excelled in striking deals, but he always needed a negotiating partner interested in finding an agreement -- and in the case of health care reform, Republicans occasionally even admitted they weren't prepared to accept any compromise, no matter what President Obama and Democrats offered.
Nearly three years later, the argument seems to have became relevant again.
As the sequester enters its second week, one right-wing politician has a surprising answer for how to break the stalemate in Washington: "We need Ted Kennedy," says Republican Kansas Governor and former Senator Sam Brownback.
"It's hard for a guy like me to say, but Ted would reach across the aisle and say 'for the good of the country' we need to solve this problem, Brownback tells me.... "You need some people stepping up like that."
Brownback served with Kennedy for 15 years, and got to know the Democrat fairly well. What's more, it's true that Kennedy would be the type of senator who would and could effectively reach out across the aisle in the hopes of working out an acceptable deal.
But even if we put aside the irony of Republicans praising Ted Kennedy -- for decades, he was a go-to rhetorical punching bag for the right -- Brownback's lament, like so much of Washington's stunted debate, overlooks the most salient detail: even if Kennedy were alive today, he'd have no one to talk to.
Right now, when it comes to the fiscal debate, Republicans have said they won't compromise, and the only acceptable deal is the one in which they get 100% of what they want. President Obama has put overly-generous concessions on the table, and invited GOP officials to outline what kind of concessions they're prepared to accept. So far, it's a blank sheet of paper.
Brownback's suggestion seems to be there's no one on the Democratic side willing, "for the good of the country," to make tough choices and accept a compromise. But in reality, we don't "need Ted Kennedy"; we need a few Republicans who Ted Kennedy would have talked to.
Leave a Comment:
Ted Kennedy, Library Lion. Sounds like a great follow-up to the Saturday morning cartoon about the bill becoming law.
Sure, we need a Ted Kennedy- the real Kennedy who would champion the cause of Economic Justice, someone willing to champion true left ideas- to take significant action on progressive policy initiatives to address our economic challenges.
If austerity and the wealthiest seizing 100% of the wealth growth of our our economy is comparable to the looming apocalypse posed by Climate Change, then what is the analog of the Green energy solution?
.
Two Yale professors (article- yale) say the way to move money into the consumer economy is an 2% tax on the equity of the top one half of one percent of tax payers. One economist has estimated this will bring in 140 billion per year in taxes. These funds could be plowed back into the consumer economy to fund a federalizing the funding of the nations elementary schools so that class sizes are uniformly set at a maximum of 24 students, and teachers are paid a fair salary comparable to their education levels. Long term strategic energy projects and rebuilding after the forecasted uptick in disasterous storms would move the balance of those funds into the middle class. Over 10 years, that is a 1.4 trillion movement of wealth into the consumer economy.
If economists like Robert Reich are correct that as long as all of the growth in wealth in the country flows not into the consumer economy but into the hands of the extremely wealthy, then the changes Obama advocates will do nothing to correct that situation. He points out that Wealth inequality dwarfs Income inequality, and that is why Obama's policies to increase the top income tax is simply trimming at the edges. Reich also claims the economy needs an Equity tax to move money back into the economy. (Salon: Beyond the Buffet Tax)
The consumer economy will continue to be starved of cash, and we will continue to see declining job participation and wages. The number of jobs for our population, and the quality of those jobs is going down, not up. Those are the facts from the Labor department, and Obama has not reversed that trend.
So why aren't we hearing about such an Equity Tax?
Good Question. Maybe part of it is because the dialog of this nation is on the terms the GOP dictates.
Maybe it is because we have no Ted or Robert Kennedy to champion such an idea. Maybe it is because we have such leaders today in Elizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown, but they hear no voices on the left who are calling for such hanges.
Maybe the presence or absence of New Left leaders is a function of us speaking up, and being unafraid to talk about bold measures such as an Equity Tax and Massive Federal projects to fight climate change- analogous in spending during WWII that got us out of our last Great Depression.
Yes, there is right now no one to negotiate with, but if there was a Senator who could get Republicans to "... ask not what your country can do for you, rather ask what you can do for your country..." it was Ted Kennedy. Nobody else has that particular history, let alone his knowledge and skills.
The position of DEM right wingers is that we need more "reasonable republicans".
That's crap. We need fewer republicans in congress, because the dynamics of the GOP means any republican willing to compromise is primaried out of office.
It's yet another example of the mendacity of DEM Right wingers. If you want a list of them people in control of DEM policy, you can start with all those who voted to trust Bush's "good faith" and authorize force in Iraq.
The Democratic Right wing happens to be the DEM arm of the Vampire Squid- and look around- they have nearly all the meaningful handles on power. The Democratic Right wing is simply part of the "great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money."
We need more Barbara Boxers, more Patty Murrays, more Wydens, Pelosis and Jeff Merkleys.
And not only fewer republicans, but fewer Bush-Lite Dems: the Clintons, Landrieus and Benens.
What we need right now is for the Democrats to fight the war that Republicans have started. We need Democrats to say "No more."
We need Democrats to make the case that the ALL the country's problems are a result of 30+ years of failed conservative ideas and policies. And that there will be no more negotiating and compromising toward the right. We need Democrats to REVERSE the direction of the country, NOT continue going right by compromising with punks that won't compromise.
What we need is a President that understands the overarching need for the country is to REVERSE the direction, and who understands that if he does nothing more than successfully make that case to the country, his 2nd term will be a success. It's not like Republicans are going to allow anything else other than begin dismantling FDR and LBJ.
Sounds like we need a new, fired up youngster to carry the torch. By the time anyone gets well known enough to run for office they become jaded or corrupted into the (money) SOP. Obama fit that bill but his being black scared a lot of people. I can't think of anyone who could jump in and pull it off now. Where are all the young, fiery Dems? The only one I can think of is Julian Castro.
I am not super confident how aggressive the two Castros would be on progressive issues if they had a cabinet position or were President- understandably they may be skewing right due to the requirements of running in Texas. My concern is not just that I have to guess where they truly stand, but that they may not be able to break this "when in doubt swing right" habit by the time they are running for President.
If you like the Castros, Nydia Velázquez of New York is someone else to pay attention to. She has strong progressive credentials, and from her grounding in small business issues could credibly champion an assault on government support of To Big Too Fail policies.
Republicans, shifting blame. Nothing new here.
Given President Obama's efforts to work with Republicans since he was elected on a pledge of seeking bipartisan solutions to national concerns, as well as the ire that he has managed to evoke from progressives in his own party as a result of his, some might say, excessive outreach efforts, one might think that he would be uniquely suited, perhaps even more so than Kennedy ever was, to work with Republicans to get things done. However, as Benen states, having one side willing to bend over backwards, sideways, and every other way imaginable way to get important national business done can't ever work unless he/she has somebody to work with on the other side. Like most Republicans, Kansas Republican Governor Sam Brownback is just offering up the latest excuse as to why Republicans will just keep on obstructing and refusing to govern while accusing Democrats and President Obama of the same. Since he is complaining about it, one might wonder why he doesn't step up to the plate and work with President Obama?
Republicans love Ted Kennedy, now that he's dead. Just like they loved Hilary Clinton, once she lost the nomination. Just like they loved Bill Clinton, once he left office. Just like they loved JFK, once he'd been assassinated. Just like they loved Truman and FDR, many years after they left office. Just like ...
Anyone else notice a pattern here?
Thank you for beating me to this.
It's a drumbeat they hope to transmit to Democrats. "These guys are losers. You USED to have a really good party. GoshOhGeeWhillikers, if only there was ANYBODY from the good ol' days of the 90's."
They don't even believe it themselves, but they'd like to shake our faith in the Democratic party. The one that next year will be responsible for Medicare expansion and the uninsured being able to afford a minimal health insurance package.
The post-Howard Dean c. 2006 Democratic party is more progressive, more effective, and sharper than the one pummeled by Newt Gingrich of 1994.
No wonder they miss the old guard so much.
What are the chances they'll be similarly embracing Obama in 2020 or so?
Republicans can show some respect for the dead?
In other words, the GOP says nothing is getting done because they don't have a Democrat like Ted reaching across the aisle to them.
Whether or not that is true, why isn't there ever a Republican who does this like Ted did?
Because the republicans don't really want to get anything done (other than reproductive issues or repealing already enacted legislation), they only want to prevent democrats from getting things done. The party of No wants someone to convince them not to say no.
Right ... All of 'em except those rotten dirty FDR's and LBJ's stinkin' up the place .
Reminds me of the schoolyard joke , there are only 24 letters in the alphabet , L&M got kicked out for smokin' .
So lets see fdr and lbj = only twenty letters in the alphabet . FDR and LBJ were kicked out for being non patrician .
Actually we need people on the other side of the aisle that understand "compromise" isn't a dirty word. WE need people on the other side that understand what the word "negotiation" means, and realize it happens between one side and another. The over-hyped 3 yr. olds that the President is currently dealing with only know how to throw tantrums!
you know its interesting that the gop always talks about the prez coming to them with an answer. now its, gee i wish ted kennedy was here with some answers. i thought the gop members of congress were elected like everyone else. how about they cross the isle with some answers. they set back and wait until a dem or the prez says, how about we do this, and then they jump all over that person. if you set in a spot with only your own viewpoint and never, i mean never, consider any other solutions how can anyone reach across that isle. you need to at least lean a little in the other persons direction. it used to be many years ago that the parties could each give a little in order to help the country move forward. sadly, it appears those days are behind us.
Republicans have compromised. They gave in on raising taxes. Where is the compromise on the Presidents half. He sill wants more taxes. That's his compromise.
And President Obama/Democrats gave in on spending cuts in 2011 and now the sequester is in effect, which is 100% spending cuts goring everybody's ox. Since the Republicans are still calling for MORE spending cuts, why can't Democrats call for more tax increases (i.e. closing loopholes) and why can't both sides, you know, compromise a bit?
The President compromised with 1 trillion in spending cuts. You know, just for your rhetoric you don't get to pretend that the 'cuts' begin every fiscal year. Otherwise, we'll begin to ask what Obama got for HIS spending cuts LAST YEAR. Oh and WHY the GOP decided to wait until the Monday after the New Year to vote on tax cuts.
It's like we're living in some Twilight Zone with these people.
Senator Ted Kennedy stood on the floor of the Senate yelling - do not go into Iraq!
Another time, Senator Ted Kennedy stood on the floor of the Senate yelling - how much more do you expect working people to pay?!?
If Kennedy was still alive, he would be lambasting the Republicans at every turn. And his floor speeches would be a sight watching him elegantly denounce the Republicans. They would be running for cover and Obamacare would never have been an election issue.
Why 'reach across the aisle' when there's nothing there but a snarling, rabid dog?
Pack of rabid pitbulls is more like it IMHO
Duge, you insult pitbulls.
Isn't Joe Biden also a guy with a long record of working with Republican senators to pass legislation? Funny how they're not talking to him.
Brownback, the guy imitating life from a movie? Not Mr. Smith, but Inherit the Wind.
Typical GOP tactic being anti-everything can only be cured by séance with the dead.
If we chose to think of the family ties we can trace the lineage back to a heritage that today is called the one percent. Then with bulk of the income producing assets being owned accordingly we might be led to understand that bulk of the population is needed to preserve the upper margins.
When we adopt a political party that 'exclusively' favors placing all the income producing assets in one category or the opposite we produce a dysfunctional system. The bulk of the population is not producing the wealth needed to preserve the upper margins favored 'exclusively' there in. Hence the current direction of increasing poverty, the usual punishment to balance the books, will be pursued until the wealth dysfunction is realized as destructive.
For at least the past 150 years, more notably they past 120 years, and with exacting documentation the past 100 years. We have oscillated between believing we have achieved a balance in one direction or in believing that we have gone too far in opposite direction. The past 30 or 40 years, is marked not by a struggle to balance the oscillating system around the norm, but to change the new belief system entirely and to embrace the dysfunction as the norm.
There nothing in the new belief system that says "that no we cannot have all the income producing assets held by the new believers", or "that no we cannot have all the poor in held locked into subsistence poverty."
The dystopian belief system in place for 13 years was represented by the luxurious view that tax free is the sure path to growth, cannot be believed otherwise when viewed from the perspective of the one percent, who wealth is growing and growing. There is not one sustained view from the disbelieving ninety percent that points to numbers indicating the contrary growth of poverty, there cannot be supportable numbers because the Ouija board of Monopoly, has wished the collection of such numbers off into the corn field in Ohio.
We are reassured that the remaining chain of economic indicators can be adjusted to show only prosperity, and the fact that we live on groceries and items excluded for the charts does not matter.
Read this excerpt and try to imagine if the survivalist branch of the NRA or the Right is following it as a script:
What a difference it makes when huge money is spent to advocate this kind of loser mentality.
Next Tarot card please, the plan is on the palm of your hand.
Kennedy was a self serving pom pas idiot who was totally out of touch with the middle class as is Kerry.
Stop projecting your behaviors onto others. Speaking of out of touch with the middle class the GOP think the middle class starts at 250k a year.
Seriously? I think we still have plenty of sleazy womanizing alcoholics in Congress as it is.
Why is Ted needed? His family needs him, he didn't deserve to die.But he is not needed in the U.S. Senate nor any other position of power.
TED...........is dead.
Yes, we need ted, then these nuts would see what REAL rape is as he protects the rapists once again. Ted murders women and they want him, atkins says they should not get pregnant and he is a pariah.
Gee another no value post by slacker how surprising is that, oh wait he has yet to make a post that had any value.