Over the past few weeks, the United States Congress has reached a stalemate in the policymaking process because of the rhetoric and rancor of partisan fighting. A wall of inactivity has been hit and both houses are exhibiting the inability to get the job done. In the House of Representatives, Republicans have been working on drafting the federal budget for the fiscal year that began on October 1. However, when passed on to President Clinton, it was quickly vetoed. Some may see this as our government working effectively -- the legislative and executive branches are keeping each other in check. However, the battle over the budget is a symbol of the hostility that exists between the House Republicans and the President. One must not forget that a few months ago, this legislative body impeached President Clinton. Undoubtedly, that has affected the working relationship. The battle for the budget is not a concern for the good of the country but rather which party can come out on top and be in the better position to win control of the House in 2000. Furthermore, it is Clinton's chance to add a notch to his Administration's list of accomplishments before leaving office.
The Senate, too, has been quite consumed with it's own partisan squabbles. Traditionally respectful and less partisan, the Senate has recently showed behavior similar to that of the House. In the past two weeks, the Senate failed to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), and failed to pass a campaign finance reform bill. While some might argue that this is the essence of our government, policymaking directed and determined by the majority, it is important to realize that the political game being played between the Democrats and Republicans is more deeply rooted in partisan bitterness. The failure of the CTBT and campaign finance bills is about more than the issues of national security, campaign finance, or the taxpayer dollars represented. This fighting is about seeking political advantage as both parties enter an election year in which control of the White House and the House of Representatives is up for grabs. It is also about the fact that Republicans in the Senate have no respect for Bill Clinton as a leader. Though the Senate did not convict Clinton in the impeachment trial, Senate Republicans loathe him. This feeling of resentment is clearly reflected in the legislative behavior of the GOP in the Senate.
What explains this breakdown of cooperation, compromise, and communication between Republicans, Democrats, and the President? One explanation is the upcoming election. The feeling of being in a constant campaign mode has infected the legislative bodies. Campaigning has always been stressed as different from legislating, yet the behavior of late suggests that legislating has become a facade for perpetual campaigning. Ambition to win votes is manifested in partisan tension and an inability to compromise and break away from party lines to get laws passed.
However, the House of Representatives and Senate are not alone in hurting the legislative process. President Clinton shares just as much of the blame, if not more. He has essentially lost his ability to lead. Republicans, and even some Democrats, no longer respect him as a leader. They view him as immoral, lacking integrity, and illegitimate. These passions have been reflected in their unwillingness to work with Clinton to execute the business of the Congress. Clinton used to be able to cross party lines. He had a certain skill for courting Republicans and compromising on policy issues. This is no longer the case. Today Clinton rides the hard party line and doing so has angered Republicans even more.
A broad change of atmosphere and direction is needed in the next president (honesty and integrity would be a bonus) in order to reunite the House and Senate and restore a working relationship to our government. Both Democratic presidential candidate Bill Bradley and Republican presidential candidate George W. Bush have touched on the problem of partisan politics and the subtlety that Washington is not working right now. Still, the agenda that Bradley presents essentially would have enormous difficulty in anything but a Democratic congress. Bush talks about working with Democrats and crossing lines, yet some of his visions might create serious troubles with House and Senate conservatives.
As the primary season approaches we must critically analyze each and every candidate. We should listen to their stances on party line issues, but also pay attention to their ability to cross party lines and lead this country with the help and respect of the members of Congress. Unless the dynamics between the House, Senate and White House change significantly in 2000, we can only expect the same inefficiency and partisan banter to continue.
