Here\u2019s the full text<\/a>. \u00a0Some of it is actually rather good, pointing out, for instance that the climate of partisanship and division isn\u2019t new, but there are a multitude of examples from our history, and that laments of corruption now likewise fail to recognize that the situation is much improved compared to Tammany Hall and Teapot Dome. \u00a0But he\u2019s got a list of causes of and solutions to the problem that are questionable. \u00a0Before I get into those \u2014 sorry, in a\u00a0separate\u00a0post \u2014 I wanted to take a few minutes writing out some of my own thoughts on the issue.<\/p>\nEssentially, we\u2019ve got three issues:<\/p>\n
First, the acrimony in Congress that means that unlike in the (perhaps mythical?) past, we\u2019ve got a level of division\u00a0that is personal. \u00a0Our congressmen, and Obama and members of his administration, don\u2019t \u201cleave it at the office\u201d and have a beer and socialize across party lines. \u00a0I\u2019ve heard this explained as simply less socializing in D.C. in general, as congressmen fly back home as often as possible, rather than thinking of D.C. as their new \u201chome,\u201d or simply prefer not to go out to a beer anyway. \u00a0 I don\u2019t really know.<\/p>\n
Second, and relatedly, in D.C., and outside of D.C., there is an increasing degree to which attacks one one\u2019s political opponents stretch beyond political disagreement to accusations that the other point of view is not just wrong, but evil: \u00a0\u201cmy opponent won\u2019t support gun control; clearly he wants children to be shot.\u201d \u00a0\u201cMy opponent wants to cut food stamp spending; clearly he wants children to starve.\u201d \u00a0\u201cMy opponent opposes state-funded healthcare; clearly he wants children to die from lack of medical treatment.\u201d \u00a0etc.<\/p>\n
Third, and you be the judge of how related these issues are, there seems to be a greater refusal to compromise in legislation. \u00a0Instead it\u2019s \u201cmy way or the highway,\u201d with bills only being passed to the extent that one party has the necessary hold on both houses and the presidency, or after a period of brinksmanship.<\/p>\n
Why?<\/p>\n
Here are a few cases:<\/p>\n
Case 1: \u00a0when\u00a0intransigence is the winning position. \u00a0Either, on your issue, you win the day, if you figure your side is able to outlast your opponent, or you take the long view and hope\u00a0to position your party to\u00a0ultimately take control and govern without need for negotiation. \u00a0And here the\u00a0uncompromising position can help rally the base, and the compromise can lose supporters, if they\u2019re likely to see things in black-and-white, and the compromise as betrayal. \u00a0This is a particularly effective strategy if you feel the media will tell your side.<\/p>\n
Case 2: \u00a0there is no natural compromise position, if both parties are genuinely convinced that anything but their goal end result is unacceptable.<\/p>\n
Case 3:\u00a0there\u2019s no point in compromising, where one party does hold all the power and sees no value in obtaining either (a) a bipartisan majority for its own sake or (b) consensus among the American people.<\/p>\n
Case 4:\u00a0the status quo is sufficiently acceptable to one party that there is no reason for them to \u201ccompromise.\u201d<\/p>\n
Case 5: \u00a0a potential compromise relies on each party trusting the other to implement\u00a0the compromise as agreed; when the trust isn\u2019t there, compromise isn\u2019t possible.<\/p>\n
Consider recent examples:<\/p>\n
Case 1: \u00a0The budget battles. \u00a0Obama felt he held all the cards, especially with his ability to close national parks and make other arbitrary decisions to ensure maximum visibility. \u00a0Republicans felt (though eventually they caved) that surrender would be punished by GOP voters, through primary losses or walking away at the general election, and Ted Cruz judged that an uncompromising position would garner him supporters.<\/p>\n
Or the current election: \u00a0consider the Democratic debate, and the fact that Sanders\u2019 supporters cheer him for being uncompromising.<\/p>\n
Case 2: \u00a0The budget battle in Illinois. \u00a0Rauner is determined to use the budget to force the Democrats to sign off on proposals weakening the influence of public sector unions, being convinced that this is the only way to move Illinois to long-term fiscal health. \u00a0Madigan is equally opposed to any such measures. \u00a0This isn\u2019t about the amount of funding for specific budget entities, but a yes or no without a middle ground.<\/p>\n
Also: \u00a0immigration reform. \u00a0No, not the Gang of 8 bill, but the fact that, from 2008 \u2013 2010, when the Democrats held the majority and yet didn\u2019t move a bill forward, there was substantial public support for a \u201cDREAM Act\u201d bill legalizing those who arrived as minors, but legalization advocates were insistent on an all-or-nothing approach, fearful that if they backed a bill legalizing the most sympathetic cases, support would evaporate for a wider mass legalization bill. \u00a0(At least that\u2019s my memory.)<\/p>\n
Case 3: \u00a0Obamacare. \u00a0\u2018Nuff said, right?<\/p>\n
Case 4: \u00a0gun control legislation. \u00a0Obama repeats that \u201cwe need to act with executive orders because Congress won\u2019t make these urgently required changes on their own,\u201d but it\u2019s clear that the majority finds the status quo entirely acceptable.<\/p>\n
Case 5: \u00a0immigration reform. \u00a0Immediate legalization and long-term implementation of enforcement requires trust, by the public, and by those who would accept legalization only as part of a compromise that includes enforcement, that the enforcement measures will actually be implemented and consisetnently applied over the long term. \u00a0Enforcement first, with promises of legalization later, requires trust that the reverse will happen. \u00a0(Well, there\u2019s also the issue that, if enforcement is applied, supporters of legalization want assurances that future legalize-ees won\u2019t be impacted, which itself means an immediate \u201cpre-legalization.\u201d) If the trust isn\u2019t there, compromise isn\u2019t possible.<\/p>\n
How do you fix this?<\/p>\n
To my mind, the lack of trust is the biggest issue, followed by the fact that the party bases reward refusal to compromise, and punish compromise \u2014 though this is related, as the punishment of compromise is often because there\u2019s a lack of trust that the politician genuinely agreed to the middle ground out of compromise rather than secretly supporting the opponent\u2019s position after all.<\/p>\n
But how you get past this, I don\u2019t know.<\/p>\n
Thoughts?<\/p>\n
(image from Wikimedia Commons,\u00a0https:\/\/commons.wikimedia.org\/wiki\/File%3AA_fist-fight_between_Lord_Brougham_and_Lord_Melbourne_as_Pea_Wellcome_V0050236.jpg)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Stay in touch! To see blog posts, and other articles I share, please like Jane the Actuary on Facebook:<\/em><\/p>\n\n
\n
Jane the Actuary<\/a><\/p>\n\u00a0<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
OK, I lied \u2014 or, rather, changed my mind. \u00a0This isn\u2019t about the latest Society of Actuaries\u2019 study on retirement readiness. \u00a0And it\u2019s got a dorky title, to boot. But Obama gave a speech about this topic on Wednesday, at the Illinois state capitol in Springfield, symbolically important to him as the place where Obama […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2209,"featured_media":3884,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[320],"class_list":["post-3881","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-political-dischord"],"yoast_head":"\n
On partisanship and division in American politics<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"OK, I lied -- or, rather, changed my mind. \u00a0This isn't about the latest Society of Actuaries' study on retirement readiness. \u00a0And it's got a dorky title,\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2016\/02\/on-partisanship-and-division-in-american-politics.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"On partisanship and division in American politics\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"OK, I lied -- or, rather, changed my mind. \u00a0This isn't about the latest Society of Actuaries' study on retirement readiness. \u00a0And it's got a dorky title,\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2016\/02\/on-partisanship-and-division-in-american-politics.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Jane the Actuary\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2016-02-12T17:15:49+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/533\/2016\/02\/A_fist-fight_between_Lord_Brougham_and_Lord_Melbourne_as_Pea_Wellcome_V0050236.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"768\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"582\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Jane the Actuary\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Jane the Actuary\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2016\/02\/on-partisanship-and-division-in-american-politics.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2016\/02\/on-partisanship-and-division-in-american-politics.html\",\"name\":\"On partisanship and division in American politics\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2016-02-12T17:15:49+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-12T17:15:49+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#\/schema\/person\/ed9b99e0bd58c5eeeebae6b82fa5a77a\"},\"description\":\"OK, I lied -- or, rather, changed my mind. \u00a0This isn't about the latest Society of Actuaries' study on retirement readiness. \u00a0And it's got a dorky title,\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2016\/02\/on-partisanship-and-division-in-american-politics.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2016\/02\/on-partisanship-and-division-in-american-politics.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2016\/02\/on-partisanship-and-division-in-american-politics.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"On partisanship and division in American politics\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/\",\"name\":\"Jane the Actuary\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#\/schema\/person\/ed9b99e0bd58c5eeeebae6b82fa5a77a\",\"name\":\"Jane the Actuary\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8d6a493d380e87d49599d5487691c9fc?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8d6a493d380e87d49599d5487691c9fc?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Jane the Actuary\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/author\/actuaryjane\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"On partisanship and division in American politics","description":"OK, I lied -- or, rather, changed my mind. \u00a0This isn't about the latest Society of Actuaries' study on retirement readiness. \u00a0And it's got a dorky title,","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2016\/02\/on-partisanship-and-division-in-american-politics.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"On partisanship and division in American politics","og_description":"OK, I lied -- or, rather, changed my mind. \u00a0This isn't about the latest Society of Actuaries' study on retirement readiness. \u00a0And it's got a dorky title,","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2016\/02\/on-partisanship-and-division-in-american-politics.html","og_site_name":"Jane the Actuary","article_published_time":"2016-02-12T17:15:49+00:00","og_image":[{"width":768,"height":582,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/533\/2016\/02\/A_fist-fight_between_Lord_Brougham_and_Lord_Melbourne_as_Pea_Wellcome_V0050236.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Jane the Actuary","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Jane the Actuary","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2016\/02\/on-partisanship-and-division-in-american-politics.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2016\/02\/on-partisanship-and-division-in-american-politics.html","name":"On partisanship and division in American politics","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#website"},"datePublished":"2016-02-12T17:15:49+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-12T17:15:49+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#\/schema\/person\/ed9b99e0bd58c5eeeebae6b82fa5a77a"},"description":"OK, I lied -- or, rather, changed my mind. \u00a0This isn't about the latest Society of Actuaries' study on retirement readiness. \u00a0And it's got a dorky title,","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2016\/02\/on-partisanship-and-division-in-american-politics.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2016\/02\/on-partisanship-and-division-in-american-politics.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2016\/02\/on-partisanship-and-division-in-american-politics.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"On partisanship and division in American politics"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/","name":"Jane the Actuary","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#\/schema\/person\/ed9b99e0bd58c5eeeebae6b82fa5a77a","name":"Jane the Actuary","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8d6a493d380e87d49599d5487691c9fc?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8d6a493d380e87d49599d5487691c9fc?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Jane the Actuary"},"url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/author\/actuaryjane"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3881","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2209"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3881"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3881\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3884"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3881"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3881"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3881"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"V0050236](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/533\/2016\/02\/A_fist-fight_between_Lord_Brougham_and_Lord_Melbourne_as_Pea_Wellcome_V0050236.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n