|
***Politics Mechanics***
Bipart Key to Agenda Bipartisanship is key to the agenda
Rottinghaus and Tedin 11 – Professors of Political Science
(Brandon Rottinghaus, Professor of Political Science, and Kent L. Tedin, Professor of Political Science, 2011, “Presidential “Going Bipartisan,” Opposition Reaction and the Consequences for Political Opinions,” The Monkey Cage, http://www.themonkeycage.org/Going%20Bipartisan%20Final.pdf)
As candidate and chief executive, Barak Obama promised the American public that his interaction with Congress would be one of accommodation and bipartisanship. Mr. Obama sought to “build a cordial relationship with Republicans by seeking guidance on policy proposals, asking for advice on appointments and hoping to avoid perceptions of political arrogance given the wide margins of his victory” (Zeleny 2008). Lamenting that “in the nation’s political debate, something is broken,” the President sought to foster an image that he and his Administration were willing to listen to and work with Republicans in Congress (Fletcher 2010). His approach is not altogether surprising. First, the American public was tired of the partisan bickering and disappointed with the (alleged) efforts at bipartisanship (Nagourney and TheeBrenan 2010). Second, “bipartisanship” is an “electoral strategy that some politicians believe will broaden their appeal, and secure the support of middle-of-the-road or swing voters” (Tubowitz and Mellow 2005, 433). Third, bipartisanship may help the president get his agenda passed into law, as some argue was the case in the 2010 lame duck Congress.
Bipartisanship is key to the agenda – motivates the center
Rottinghaus and Tedin 11 – Professors of Political Science
(Brandon Rottinghaus, Professor of Political Science, and Kent L. Tedin, Professor of Political Science, 2011, “Presidential “Going Bipartisan,” Opposition Reaction and the Consequences for Political Opinions,” The Monkey Cage, http://www.themonkeycage.org/Going%20Bipartisan%20Final.pdf)
The implications from our findings suggest that discussion of bipartisanship is not an empty exercise. Presidents can improve their own approval for all respondents when their message is viewed in isolation but the effect is much greater when paired with a bipartisan message from the opposition. This is especially true for Democrats who we would expect to support the President anyway, but is also notably true for Republicans. Yet, it takes two to be bipartisan. The opposition party can hurt the approval of the sitting president if they reject bipartisan advances with a partisan response. In fact, Democrats and independents that see the President making overtures and being rejected in a bitterly partisan way are more likely to disapprove of the President. The response from the opposition matters as well. As the partisan messages from the House Minority Leader grow more partisan, Democrats’ ratings of the Republican Party go from very small to negative, not a surprise since these groups were predisposed to not favor the opposition party. On the other hand, as the response from Representative Boehner grew more partisan, Republicans grew more likely to favor the Republican Party. Although independents are not especially persuaded by bipartisan messages from either or both parties, they are certainly angered by partisan messages from the opposition party as the evidence suggests that the aggressive partisan message from John Boehner significantly reduced support for the Republican Party.
AT: Bipart Key to Agenda Bipartisanship fails—not key to the agenda and weakens bills.
Sargent ‘10
(Greg, the editor of Election Central, Talking Points Memo's politics and elections. “Liberals were right about futility of bipartisanship”. May 17, 2010. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/05/the_liberals_were_right_about.html)
Liberals were right about futility of bipartisanship There's another fascinating revelation buried in The Promise, Jonathan Alter's new book on Obama's first year: Specifically, it turns out key players on health care had decided early on that the quest for GOP support was futile -- yet they continued pursuing it anyway. Many on the left, of course, were loudly claiming at the time that Dems were falling into the GOP's trap by continuing to chase bipartisan support for its own sake. But those making this argument were dismissed as unserious and unschooled in the real workings of Washington. Turns out, though, that this was a view shared inside the White House. Alter writes that top Obama aides concluded early that the pursuit for Chuck Grassley's support in particular was not going to pay off. Senior Obama adviser Jim Messina, for instance, pleaded with Senator Max Baucus, who at the time was trying to cut an awesomely bipartisan deal with Senate Republicans, to forget about Grassley. Rahm Emanuel agreed with Messina that Grassley was a non-starter. "They thought the president was wasting his time by having Grassley over to the White House half a dozen times," Alter writes. Harry Reid, too, had concluded early on that bipartisan support for health reform would never materialize -- but he let Baucus continue pursuing it, anway. "Harry Reid knew from long experience with the opposition that there would be no `Kumbaya moment' when the Republicans would concede error and convert to support for comprehensive health care reform," Alter writes. "But Reid was old-school and deferred to Baucus." As one White House aide condeded to Alter: "I wish we'd put our foot down harder and said, 'It's over, Max.'" These players, of course, have their own reasons for leaking this account now. But it seems feasible. After all, a five year old could see at the time that Senate Republicans were playing for time, in order to drag the process on for as long as possible and sour the public on it. Depressing.
Link outweighs link turn – Bipartisanship isn’t key if Obama has political capital
Tomma 9’
(Steven Tomma, staff writer, 1-30-2009, “Obama finds partisanship still alive and well n Washington,” Miami Herald, http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2009/01/30/61191/obama-finds-partisanship-still.html)
Well, score a big one for civility. President Obama has met repeatedly with Republicans, inviting several for cocktails at the White House this week even after they voted against his proposed $819 billion plan to boost the economy. He's asked more over on Sunday to watch the Super Bowl. He's batting zero so far in the quest for bipartisanship, however. After watching congressional Democrats move the stimulus proposal more toward spending and away from the tax cuts that Republican prefer, he failed to muster a single Republican vote for the package in the House of Representatives. Does it matter? Not when it comes to passing legislation. Like Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1933, Obama has enough popularity, a nationwide hunger for action to address a crisis and big enough majorities in Congress to get pretty much what he wants with nominal bargaining in the Senate to reach the necessary 60 votes.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
