The Problem with Political Compromise
Posted: Monday, November 15, 2010
by Tex Norman
Understanding the concept of compromise.
When we use the word compromise it describes a process where two or more parties come to some mutual agreement by making mutual concessions. The process of compromise works when the parties have not only conflicting goals, but common goals. When you start negotiating the sale of a house the seller usually has an amount that they say is THEIR BOTTOM LINE, as low as they will go, and often will use the word FIRM. Firm means you will NOT compromise on that amount. But there are other factors that pull on the seller. Maybe he has two mortgages, maybe he needs to move by a particular date. If the pressures to get the house sold are great enough the firm, low as they will go, bottom line is not actually firm. If the pressure to sell is great enough, and if the buyer's desire for the property is great enough, then there will be some number, some point, some area of compromise. When the seller needs to sell badly enough, and when the buyer wants the house badly enough the parties will settle on a price somewhere between the asking price and the offer. That is compromise.
The concept of compromise sometimes works even in politics. One side might give up something they want to get something in a bill that they want MORE. Sometimes one side will accept less than what they want thinking getting some part of what you want is better than getting nothing. More and more political compromise occurs less often, and is fast becoming impossible. Why? Because when both sides are FIRM then both sides are will accept nothing less than 100% of what they want.
If you are a true believer, if you are committed, if you are a zealots then how can you consider compromise? The real believer does not simply want part of what they want, they don't have any interest in enacting part of their agenda, they want all of what they want, and that is all they will accept. The true convert can't be true if they accept a piece of the pie. In fact, a zealot can't accept even the whole pie, they have to control the entire table, they have to manage the kitchen staff.
Many of the newly elected Tea Bag Republicans can only be described as zealots. These political true believers are coming to congress with this single minded focus on achieving their goals, and their goals are firm, clear, and there is little (to NO) wiggle room. These Tea Bag Republicans are different from the Republicans of the past because they are coming to the bargaining table with a well advertized unwillingness to compromise. In the minds of many, you are either a true believer, or just a con man willing to wheel and deal. If you will accept less than 100 % of what you claim you believe then you have no real beliefs, no values, no scruples.
Progressive (liberal) Democrats have, among their numbers some zealots equally committed to their believes and just as inflexible as their counter parts. I would make a horrible elected leader because I lean toward this single minded commitment to what I believe. My problem with Obama is he is too willing to compromise.
The immovable object meets the irresistible force.
The obvious problem is that if both sides come to the bargaining table, unwilling to compromise, then nothing gets done.
Isaac Asimov was once asked what would happen if the immovable object met the irresistible force? His answer was this: NOTHING. The two equally opposing forces cancel each other out.
I do not believe that Tea Bag Republicans were elected because they represent the lion's share of American political thought. I believe Republicans won the House back because the middle class is suffering, they feel the Obama administration has moved too fast, and the changes have been too great, and they want someone to drag their foot and slow things down. The Tea Bag Republicans are there to tap on the breaks.
Of course some will object and say, no, the Tea Bag movement is there to stomp on the breaks, and then throw us in a reverse gear and move backward. If the Tea Bag Republicans had won the Senate as well as the House I would be open to that interpretation. I have no doubt that the Tea Bag legislators are going to stomp on the breaks as hard as they possibly can, and they are going to do everything they can to force us into a reverse gear, but that is not what I think the majority want.
If the majority just wants to slow the Obama train down, then this election should do just that. But if the electorate wanted Congress to run smoothly, and get things done with less rancor, with no mudslinging, with the elimination of negativity then the electorate failed miserably. What we have elected are believers on opposite sides of the negotiating table and both sides are telling their supporters, I will get 100 % of what we want, and if I can't do that I will make sure the other side gets 0% of what they want.
This Article has been viewed 1,294 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (4 total)If you are looking at the history of this “Tea Bag” as a “movement” it makes you really think.
I listened to Barack Obama's press conference after the mid-term results were out, and I was so impressed with him. He spoke so intelligently of how there will be areas where compromise is not possible, and he was firm on that, but he also said that those areas where compromise is possible must be found and worked on.There is so much antagonism and war and fighting in the world, that his attitude and words were a balm to me. I also don't believe the Tea Party represented the voice of America. They made a lot of noise, but that doesn't mean they have a lot of representative power. I think they'll disintegrate with time.
Political compromise has happened here in the UK to a greater or lesser degree (depends on your point of view) and it appears to work - so far!A coalition government does appear to have reduced the over the top views of both political parties that make it up and brought some sensible policies for once.I'm no fan of compromise, I voted for the party I wanted in power for my own reasons, but, the coalition, I have to admit, does seem to work.Having said that, ask me again in a year :)
Very well said Tex, you get right to the core of the matter.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.