Are Democrats Too Divided to Succeed?

Today’s lead story in The New York Times is titled, “Obama’s Budget Faces Challenge by Party Barons.” It describes how President Obama’s consensual approach with Congress may wind up eviscerting many of his proposals when it is translated into actual language by five prominent Democrats: Max Baucus, Chairman of the Senate’s Finance Committee; Kent Conrad, Chairman of the Senate’s Budget Committee, Charles Rangel, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee; John Spratt, Chairman of the House Budget Committee; and Henry Waxman, Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Each Democrat is defending special interests from its own committee, interests conflicting with some of President Obama’s signature program. The Democrats are opposing a limitation on tax deductions for the most wealthy Americans and a cut in government subsidies to big farmers and large agricultural businesses. They want to decrease spending on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security even more than President Obama. And the proposed cap-and-trade system to discourage carbon dioxide emissions may be in trouble, too.

That’s one of the main problems when you have a President proposing legislation for a national constituency while members of Congress are concerned about their local constituencies. This is a natural feature of our democracy since its founding and even led to the creation of a bicameral legislative branch: the House, with short two-year terms, to stay close to the people, and the Senate, with six-year terms, and more “enlightened” leadership.

Hopefully, in a time of crisis, Congressional representatives will be able to suspend concern about their own jobs and act in the national interest. Whether they will end up doing so or not, remains to be seen.