Self service before public service: An example

A flaw in our two party system is that the Democratic and Republican parties usually put their political interests the public interest. That includes serving interests with money before the public. Weakness shows itself from time to time. This time, the federal budget debate blows away the smoke and mirrors. The problem is obvious. Neither party takes political leadership in the public interest seriously, certainly not before service to others.

According to a CNN report, Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) accused president Obama of a "lack of seriousness" on fiscal issues. CNN quoted Mr. McConnell as saying "I have said repeatedly -- and I know Speaker (John) Boehner has as well -- that with regard to .... entitlements, we're waiting for presidential leadership. We know and will say again that entitlement reform will not be done except on a bipartisan basis with presidential leadership. . . . . . It doesn't have to be in public. We all understand there are some limitations to negotiating significant agreements in public. But we're still waiting for the president to lead."

What does that show?

How does that reveal anything about any political priorities? In the case of Mr. McConnell, it clearly shows that the Republicans will not propose anything first. If they did, they would take political flack for reducing popular spending. Entitlements and military spending are popular, but that's where big spending cuts need to be made if federal deficit spending is going to be tamed.

McConnell has repeatedly stated that the Republican party's top priority is to insure that president Obama is not reelected in 2012. That seems to make job creation and budget control lower priorities. Now all of a sudden, he wants "political leadership" from the person he blames for all of America's problems, including what he sees as cruel Socialist catastrophes like the job killing Obamacare law, the job killing stimulus spending plan and the job killing extension of unemployment benefits in the job killing lame duck session last December.

What he is really saying

Look carefully at what CNN quotes McConnell as saying. In essence, he is saying, this: "Us Republicans are not dumb enough to make a real proposal first and in public. We would get slaughtered in public opinion just like President Reagan did when he proposed social security changes in 1983. We are going to go behind closed doors with you odious Socialists, hatch our plans jointly and then you, Mr. President, will give the public the bad news. That way you take a big hit and both parties take the remaining hit equally. Then we will be free to spin things as the Democrat's fault. Then us Republicans will blow you inept Socialist Democrats out office in 2012 and blame you for 100% of the pain, even if much of it was our fault. The public will never know or remember which party did what because it was hatched behind closed doors. But, they will remember you, Mr. President. By election time, we will be in full spin and blame the opposition mode. And our Republican spin is much, much better than your Democratic spin. We guarantee it. You will lose in 2012."

Timid Republicans

In effect, that is exactly what Mr. McConnell is saying. Look at his CNN quote: "It doesn't have to be in public. We all understand there are some limitations to negotiating significant agreements in public. But we're still waiting for the president to lead." Why would he say that if the Republican had true political courage? What are those "limitations"? Informing the public of how awful both parties are? The obvious answer is that McConnell would not say that if his useless party had any courage and wasn't just as culpable as the Democrats.

Timid Democrats

President Obama responds in kind. According to a Politico report, Obama said this: “This is not a matter of you go first or I go first. . . . . . everybody . . . . ultimately [needs to get] in that boat at the same time so it doesn’t tip over.” Tipping the boat over is a euphemism for not having only one party take blame for telling the American people how much the cuts are going to hurt. No courage from the Democrats either.

Opaque first, transparent second

It can't be any clearer. The Democratic and Republican parties serve themselves before they serve the public. Neither wants the blame and backlash from what is about to be unleashed on us. We will get the news from secret behind closed door discussions and have little or no chance to object. Recall Speaker John Boehner's recent pledge to make congress more transparent? That's just empty rhetoric from a partisan hypocrite. One can surmise that average Americans will get the transparency thing only when and if it serves the political parties' interests. As usual, the stunning hypocrisy here is completely irrelevant to these people.

So, what does the situation here show? Real political leadership in the public interest or something else? I am not alone in questioning the loyalties of the two parties - Solomon Kleinsmith at Rise of the Center are asking similar questions in this and other contexts.

This is just one more reason to leave the Democratic and Republican parties in favor of something new and different. They continue to fail and betray the public trust in favor of their personal interests.