POLITICS - 'No Labels' Goals

NOTE:  I contribute to 'No Labels' but doubt that much will get done with today's Republican Party.  Also, any 'pledge' is not the same as what they will actually do once in office.

All politicians 'fib.'

"Can setting bipartisan goals disrupt political dysfunction?" PBS NewsHour 1/11/2016

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  As the presidential campaigns compete hard to win over voters, the bipartisan group No Labels is trying to bring the parties together, rallying candidates around a policy agenda pledge focused on jobs, Social Security and Medicare, balancing the federal budget and energy security.  Judy Woodruff talks to the group’s co-chairs, former Gov. Jon Huntsman and former Sen. Joe Lieberman.

JUDY WOODRUFF (NewsHour):  And while the candidates jockey for position and try to win over voters, the bipartisan group called No Labels is still hammering away at its goal of bringing the parties together.

Today, they announced Republicans Ben Carson, Chris Christie, John Kasich, Rand Paul, and Donald Trump, and one Democrat, Martin O'Malley, have all signed a pledge to work toward the No Labels policy agenda, which calls for creating jobs, securing Social Security and Medicare, balancing the federal budget, and making the United States energy-secure.

A short time ago, I spoke with the group’s co-chairs, former Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman and former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman.

Senator Lieberman, Governor Huntsman, thank you for joining us.

So, you have five Republicans and one Democrat who have signed this pledge.  What exactly are they pledging to do, Governor Huntsman?

JON HUNTSMAN, Former Governor, Co-Chair, No Labels:  Well, they are pledging to embrace a process for goal-setting and leadership in a bipartisan fashion, drawing from the elements of a national strategic agenda, which include four big policy categories, jobs, entitlements, energy, and a balanced budget.

And, essentially, every one of the six candidates, a very diverse group, I might add, they are stating that they will support the national strategic agenda, and, number two, they will sit down and meet with a bipartisan group of congressional leaders within 30 days of being elected to the presidency, and, third, to establish a goal of drawing from one of those big issue categories and leading out in a bipartisan fashion in delivering what the American people really are looking for.

JUDY WOODRUFF:  Well, Senator Lieberman, hearing this, aren’t these, though, the kind of general goals stated in a broad-brush way that just about anyone could agree to?

JOE LIEBERMAN, Former Senator, Co-Chair, No Labels:  Well, that’s exactly the way we framed them, because we’re operating from the premise that we’re trying to disrupt the dysfunction in the Washington political system.

We’re trying to create some incentives for people to work together, and one of the best ways is to have people agree at least on commonly held goals.  That’s the four policy areas.  So, really, left, right, center, Democrat, Republican, should agree on the goals, and then for these presidential candidate to promise, if they get elected that, within the first 30 days in office, they will call members of Congress, both parties in, to begin negotiating to get something done on at least one of the goals.

Frankly, I’m surprised all that 15 of the current presidential candidates didn’t sign on to this.  I’m grateful that the six did, but I’m puzzled that the other nine haven’t, and we’re going to continue to pursue them to make our case that it’s not asking much for them to pledge, promise to work together across party lines, which hasn’t happened very much in Washington lately.

POLITICS - Proposal to "Make Congress Work"

This is No-Labels "Make Congress Work" plan:

(click to get readable view)


The plan is outstanding, but....

I am pessimistic that this will work because it is not in a politician's interest to do so. Politicians, by their nature, are MOST interested in keeping power and these "ways" just give up their power.

None of the proposed "ways" can to fruition UNLESS the American voter actually forces the issue at to polls.

OPINION - Lieberman's Outstanding Proposal

"A modest proposal to rein in congressional partisanship" by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman (I-CT), The Hill 12/14/2011

Next month, I will visit the House chamber to hear the State of the Union Address as a sitting Senator for the last time. As an American, it has been an honor and privilege to the see the President’s speech in person for the last 23 years. But I have often thought that perhaps it would be useful for Americans, if the President regularly appeared before Congress and responded to our questions.

A new non-partisan group called No Labels— together with thousands of supporters nationwide—is seeking now to provide Congress this opportunity. Under a proposal contained in the No Labels’ “Make Congress Work” campaign, the House and Senate would issue rotating monthly invitations for the President to appear in the respective chamber to answer questions and engage members in discussion. Democrats and Republicans would take turns asking questions for the duration of the 90-minute, televised session. Only one issue would be covered per appearance. The President would be welcome to bring Cabinet members and other high-ranking officials to help to clarify the discussion when needed.

For someone who has spent nearly a quarter-century in the Senate, this sounds like a pretty good deal.

No Labels understands that the President is a President; not a Prime Minister. America doesn’t operate under a parliamentary system. As such, the President is not considered a Party leader in the legislature and has no formal responsibility to report to it on a monthly basis. At the same time, however, we are all familiar with “Question Time” in the British House of Commons and other countries with similar legislative structures – and we are equally familiar with the potential for such events to devolve into partisan screaming matches that do little to advance consensus.

Given the current political mood in Congress, many might wonder why an American version of question time would be any different. How could this plan contribute to the goal of reducing polarization, promoting constructive discussion and breaking the gridlock that has frozen our legislative process?

First, No Labels’ proposal provides for a far more controlled environment. With time limits imposed on responses and strict rules designed to encourage civility, the event would look more like a presidential debate than a town hall. Televising the events would further assist in establishing the proper sense of decorum. As we have seen throughout American history, and again in recent years, vitriolic outbursts and insults launched on the floor ultimately harm those who hurl them far more than the targets.

Second, No Labels’ proposal would nurture results by infusing transparency and accountability into the governing process. Right now, we place more emphasis on campaigning than governing. As a result, the American people focus more on what candidates promise to do next year and less on what those holding public office need to do next week. What we are left with is a framework that makes the people’s voice too easy to ignore. No Labels’ plan would help correct that imbalance by offering the public a real-time look at how their elected leaders plan to address urgent national priorities.

Finally, the very act of coming together in such a way would send a message to the vast majority of moderates – both here in the U.S. and indeed throughout the world – that our country takes the dangers of hyper-partisanship seriously and is willing to take steps to that will foster compromise.

Creating the time and space for regular, constructive discussions between Congress and the President is a small step. However, in the face of a pervasive culture of ideology that is crippling our government, even a modest step in the right direction could have a significant impact.

I hope that my colleagues will join me in supporting this proposal.

What an OUTSTANDING idea! At least for the American people.