Risking progress?
Update: "the filibuster"
The other guy?
If Democrats can manage any improvements on this plan, go for it. But not at the risk of doing nothing. Even breaking it up for the sake of getting what should not be bargaining chips*, for the sake of "the debt" or sticking to principles or campaign promises, may have adverse impacts to the econonomy, and with it being even more of an up hill, problematic legislature, getting more done may not be on the table. Some have argued for a line item veto...for the president. Not to revive that arguement, but imagine[**] the impact on the political calculus if congress had a line item veto after all the work of crafting legislation, be it this plan or another.
*trading doing the right thing for allowing the wrong thing
[post-post-google tangent hmmm?]
[** post post realization that this sentence is a paradox of sorts; Congress is bi-cameral and does have line item vetos, it just has to go back to the other house and branch. I guess my point rests on one body having a line item veto or final say on another branch's work.]
No comments:
Post a Comment