By Don Schmitz
Compromise in the legislative process is important, and we used to be better at it in America. Over the last few decades, Congress has grown increasingly gridlocked along party lines, with both parties more interested in partisan gain rather than doing the people’s work.
Legislative gridlock has doubled in the last 65 years. The 80th Congress in 1948 passed legislation on 70 percent of their significant issues, but the 112th Congress in 2012 passed only 29 percent of their major items, according to the Brookings Institute. In 2023, the 118th Congress passed the fewest bills in modern history.
It is true that things are more partisan gridlocked today than historically, but what happened? Polarization between the parties, which is reflective of the polarization of the American people, is the obvious catalyst for this trend. Although America enjoyed a political center in the ’50s, polarized politics has historically been the norm for our country. In fact, there are many who believe the less that Congress does to spend money and pass more regulations, the better.
Take, for example, the $1.2 trillion spending bill Congress passed this weekend. It averts a government shutdown, which is proper, funding 70 percent of the government until September. It was passed by the House 286-134, with more Democratic votes than Republicans. Many Republicans voted no, as did some Democrats. Nothing wrong with that, it is the legislative debate process in action. However, the spending bill is unfunded, fueling the deficit runaway train ballooning a debt that is bankrupting our country. We are currently $35 trillion in debt, which is 129 percent of our GDP. Interest on the debt will cost us $870 billion this year, larger than the entire defense budget of $822 billion. On our current spending path, we will be $54.39 trillion in debt by 2034.
According to the University of Pennsylvania, on this current path without painful corrective measures like huge tax increases and spending cuts in programs in the next few years, the United States will default on its debt. Our economy, and the world economy, will crash. Even without that cataclysmic outcome, fixing this will certainly mean draconian cuts in federal programs, and tax increases on the already struggling middle class. Strident calls are already being made to increase taxes on corporations which currently taxed at a global average. Of course, corporations simply pass on their costs to consumers, spiking our cost of living, and over-taxing them means they leave America for other countries more business-friendly. It’s a helluva thing that we are doing to our children and grandchildren.
Fiscal conservatives, of which there are very few in either party, are furious at this spending bill. Actually, there are only 10 “Blue Dog” Democrats of the 218 in the house that take a fiscally responsible balanced budget position, while many Republicans talk the talk, but don’t walk the walk. Everyone else is giving each other high fives and congratulatory back-slapping for not shutting down the government via this spending bill. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene filed a motion to kick out. the Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, because he didn’t demand more spending cuts, although she left out a component that would have required a vote within two days. It was a symbolic shot across the bows.
I’m no fan of Rep. Greene, who has threatened a “national divorce” over our current path. Anyone who suggests succession is my avowed enemy, but even a broken clock is right twice a day. I don’t believe in refusing to compromise on legislation, but what is a principled elected official to do when they see unending deficit spending bankrupting our children? Some have concluded that they cannot in good conscience vote for more debt. Some politicians, and many voters, albeit not close to a majority, have concluded that it would be preferable to stop funding the government with deficit spending bills and require it to run off the billions in taxes it already receives monthly, without borrowing more money. Some are willing to play the part of spoilers and take the heat for not compromising and being “bipartisan.” Although it has shaped up to be the Republicans demanding cutting the deficit, the aforementioned hard line shouldn’t be a partisan issue, unless Democrats want to admit that they don’t care about the debt. Is it truly partisan gridlock to demand that we don’t bankrupt our children? Yes it is, because the fiscal hawks want deeper “cuts” than those agreed to by President Joe Biden and then House Speaker Kevin McCarthy last May. That agreement was bipartisan. But the cuts weren’t in spending, they were cuts in the growth of spending. The feds deficit spending in February alone was $296 billion, in just one month. Legislative compromise is laudable, but not when it constitutes national suicide.