I’m a firm believer that usually, it’s good when politicians in Washington are so divided that they can’t pass new legislation. When they’re gridlocked they can’t raise our taxes, pass ridiculous political speech laws like the Campaign Finance Reform, and the like. There are exceptions, of course: we need swift consensus votes on important matters like lowering our tax burden and prosecuting important military campaigns.
But while gridlock is good, it can also be tedious. Take, for example, today’s news that Senator Russ Feingold wants Congress too “censure” President Bush for his management of the Iraq war. In fact, Feingold has a whole litany of political spankings he would like to see handed out, which he listed on Meet the Press today.
Gridlock is Good
Feingold proves gridlock is good, because without it, this guy might actually be able to cause some serious damage to the country. The only reason this won’t get traction is because Senate Majority Leader Reid knows that it wouldn’t get passed in the current very divided Congress.
Gridlock is Tedious
Feingold also proves that gridlock is tedious, because here we have a US Senator proposing that Congress pass utterly meaningless “censures,” which would do absolutely nothing except waste time and more tax money. Even if Feingold could corral up enough of his peers to pass these censures, they mean nothing. Bush would still be the Commander in Cheif, Gonzales would still be Attorney General, and Halliburton would still be the only company capable of coordinating civil logistics in occupied territories of the Middle East.
Feingold can’t actually think he will get anywhere with these absurd censure votes, and most certainly knows that they would accomplish absolutely nothing. Bush has proved on many occasions that his policies aren’t poll-based, and a “poll” of Congress’ opinion of Bush is just as irrelevant to him.
Feingold is just trying to score points with his liberal base at home. With gridlock, that’s really all he can accomplish. And that’s a good thing.
