This is much bigger than Massachusetts

Will the politicians in Washington listen to the voters’ wake-up call or hit snooze? Cal and Bob warn that a vote-the-bums-out wave might soon come crashing down on the nation’s capital.
Cal Thomas is a conservative columnist. Bob Beckel is a liberal Democratic strategist. But as longtime friends, they can often find common ground on issues that lawmakers in Washington cannot. View the video version of this column at blogs.usatoday.com/oped or at USA TODAY's YouTube channel at youtube.com/usatoday.

Today: Lessons of Massachusetts.

Cal: You and I have been at this political stuff long enough to know that when one side loses the other side says it wasn't about their side. Instead, they had a bad candidate, or "we didn't get our message out" ... anything to avoid the obvious conclusion.

Bob: But as I said last week on television, the Democrats' loss in the deep-blue Bay State is simply unspinnable.

Cal: Ahhh, the Massachusetts Miracle. The obvious conclusion from this election is the same as it was in 2008, when Democrats were popping the bubbly and letting the confetti fly: People are tired of behind-the-scenes deals, lack of transparency and payoffs to politicians. President Obama vowed to change that. Or was it that he hoped to? Either way, he hasn't, and the party in power is paying.

Bob: One man's miracle is another man's nightmare! But you're right about where the voters are. They're angry, and they have plenty of reasons to be angry. But the problem for the president is that his expectation levels were so high in 2008 that no politician — in fact, no person — could live up to them.

Cal: Hold on for a moment, Bob, while I grab a tissue to dab away my tears. Our poor, poor president. It wasn't that he wasn't good enough, but that he wasn't great enough? You're right, as hard as you try, this isn't spinnable!

Bob: I wasn't finished! I was going on to say that I think Obama does deserve some criticism because through soaring rhetoric, of which he is the master, the people assumed change was coming soon. Clearly people believed him, but they have yet to see it and are still mired in their six-year funk.

Cal: That's good analysis. When I listened to the Democrats' reaction to the election, it sounded like the same old song. One example: Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey wrote that "Republicans will be even more emboldened to obstruct progress and distort the truth in their quest to protect the status quo." Does he think voters want more of that?

Bob: They don't, and you're already seeing Democrats recalibrating. Just a day after the Massachusetts Mayhem — rather than Miracle! — the president said he didn't want health care jammed through, and that the Congress shouldn't proceed without Sen.-elect Scott Brown. I think he got the message.

Cal: We know the president likened himself to Reagan during the campaign. Now we'll see whether he's more like the Gipper or more like the Screamer, Howard Dean, who said the loss is because the government hasn't been progressive enough!

Bob: Let me interrupt this chastising of Democrats to bring a moment of reflection to our back-and-forth, Cal. We would be remiss if we don't smack the Republicans around, too. They've been roadblocks to the president's agenda and have put the "P" in partisanship. Having said that, the Democrats gave up too quickly on their attempts at bipartisanship and immediately went into an us-vs.-them mentality early last year.

Cal: I agree with you to some extent, though I reserve the right — as do Republicans — to block what is deemed to be bad policy.

Bob: What we've just witnessed with the health care death march, though, is what happens in this atmosphere: nothing productive. The country has monumental problems that aren't being dealt with because of monumental incompetence in Washington.

Cal: Agreed. And Republicans still drunk with happiness from last week's victory need to sober up — and quickly. Massachusetts might just be the canary in the coal mine for a "throw the bums out" midterm election. But if you look at the polls, voters judge Democrats and Republicans both as bums.

Bob: Yet Washington has heard this message for several years now, and the partisanship train rolls on.

Cal: You heard Obama in his State of the Union address Wednesday night. He's at least saying some of the right things. Now let's hope he does some of the right things going forward.

Bob: He's got a smart team around him, and he has good political instincts. Don't underestimate the steep learning curve required for a new president. Some Democrats already are suggesting that he should hunker down and ram through health care. My answer to that: Don't. He should start over with Republicans and take control of the legislative process. But I doubt Republicans have any intention of starting over, and I suspect Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have no interest in sitting down with Republicans, either.

Cal: A USA TODAY/Gallup Poll last week said 55% of Americans want the president to consider health care alternatives that would garner Republican support. A good idea?

Bob: Absolutely. But again, I hope you're here standing with me when/if the GOP doesn't negotiate with him in good faith. I'll be watching, and I know the voters will be, too.

Cal: Principled Republicans and Democrats should make a covenant with the country that fits with what the majority cares about. If they won't fix the problems, they should promise to resign, or not run for re-election. If they do fix it, they get re-elected. Brown won because he appeared to be a man of largely conservative convictions. He didn't spout the usual political talking points. He seemed to mean what he said, and he has pledged to do what he promised. That's what resonates with voters who are fed up with both parties.

Bob: I don't see those assets in Brown as clearly as you do, but one thing is certain: He benefited from a voter backlash that almost any acceptable Republican would have received in that race. The Democrats were quick to form a circular firing squad. They need to recognize this was not exclusively about health care, or a bad candidate, or a referendum on Obama. This was a vote against the continued tone-deafness of politicians in Washington. This is much bigger than Massachusetts.

Cal: What frustrates all of us is that nothing ever seems to change. We have these little minirevolutions, and then two years later, we're back to square one. Is there any hope, or is the process too far gone to save?

Bob: I have little hope of progress between now and the November elections, because neither side will risk giving the other a legislative advantage. So expect more gridlock. But let's get specific. Sometimes common ground means simply listening to your political opponent and engaging in constructive efforts — even when the efforts don't produce legislative fruits. We've had little of that from either Democrats or Republicans in the past several years.

Cal: And yet the challenges mount: Terrorism, the economy and joblessness, two wars, unsustainable red ink. And I'm just getting started.

Bob: Yet Washington fiddles as Rome burns. Let's pledge this: In this column in the year ahead, we will stop — when necessary — and begin a Hall of Shame for lawmakers whom we agree are a part of the problem rather than the common ground solution.

Cal: I like it, Bob. As French philosopher Blaise Pascal said, "The only shame is to have none." That could be said for the shameless masses in Washington, but we can still call 'em as we see 'em.

Bob: And as we learned last week, the voters are doing the same.

Posted at 12:16 AM/ET, January 28, 2010 in Common Ground, Elections/Voting - Forum, Forum commentary

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2010/01/ ... .html#more