As the midterm elections approach, Democrats are starting to
break from the president on issues such as the Keystone pipeline. While this is
anything but unprecedented (when the President, who no longer has to worry
about re-election, pushes an agenda while Congress does need to worry about
re-election), it is a serious problem for the continuation of Obama’s agenda
(at least until after the election).
Unfortunately much of this opposition largely stems from a
political decision. I would love to see Democrats opposing the radical Obama
agenda. For example: a study has shown that there are no severe environmental
concerns associated with the Keystone XL Pipeline. Thus, no reasonable
environmentalist ought to oppose construction on those grounds. The most likely
reason for the opposition is nothing more than politics. Someone who would
sacrifice the good of the nation for politics is radical to the point of
absurdity.
President Obama isn't likely going to be able to pass anything from his agenda since he is a second-term president. I'm hoping the split forming in the Democratic party is a temporary one and that it won't follow the lines of the Republican party with the formation of something like the Tea Party. That would only worsen the gridlock that is already present in Congress.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you 100%, Olivia. The divide among democrats would definitely make matters worse in congress. Instead of working together as they should be, there would be even more of a focus on the differences among the members. When it comes to president Obama, it seems as if the members of his party have somewhat lost interest in his goals, and are more focused on what comes next. Of course, they want to keep a democrat in office.
ReplyDeleteI completely understand not agreeing with all of Obama's policies as a democrat - it happens. However, I hope the democrats in congress and otherwise realize that a large party division - like what the republicans are facing right now - benefits no one. However, I don't think this "election-year dissent" is anywhere close to what happened to the Republican Party, so I doubt there is much to worry about.
ReplyDeleteAs Obama stretches into his lame duck period he will surely have a hard time passing anything on his agenda. If the Democrats break away into something like the Tea Party for the Republicans, congress will be screwed as Olivia said. Right now another division is the last thing this country needs. Hopefully nothing catastrophic happens anytime soon.
ReplyDeleteBeing in his second term, as just about everyone has acknowledged, Obama is going to push for his agenda, because he doesn't need to worry about reelection. I'm sure he realizes he has no chance for this passing, but because he is going to be on his way out he doesn't care. As to the issue at hand, I am completely impartial. I had no idea it was happening, and if as Andrew says it has no effect on the environment, why not go for it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with pretty much everyone here. Although not everyone has the same opinions as the president, it's best not to creat a huge uproar about it (in the Democratic Party.) it seems like we're all using the republicans as an example, which is completely accurate. The democrats have to realize that they do not want a split in their party like the republicans do. Once they realize that, compromises should be very smooth.
ReplyDeleteThe Democrats need only glance at the Tea Party to prevent this split within the Democratic party. If the Democrats can stay united in one front, then they have a better chance of retaining the White House and winning more seats in Congress. President Obama is naturally going to have a tougher time passing anything at this point, but hopefully the Democratic party does not create more polarization in American politics by splitting.
ReplyDeleteLike everyone else, I agree that it will he very difficult for Obama to get any major programs passed at this point. However, as far as Andrew's comment a out the Keystone Pipeline, it does have dignificant environmental effects. The oil pumped through those pipelines comes from the oil sands in Canada, which costs about $15 for the production of one barrel, unlike the Saudi oil which costs $1-2 to produce. Oil sands require significantly more energy to extract the oil, which uses fossil fuels (hence the bad environmental effects), they also require a lot of habitat destruction to just get at the sands. This can also result in some other outcomes such as subsidence (land collapsing) and the releaĊĦe of methane as a by product, a greenhouse gas which contibutes to climate change. The project is a waste of money because it's short sighted. Our money would be better spent on alternate energies then trying to suck the last drops of oil from the earth, especially when it costs more.
ReplyDeleteThe dissent within the Democratic party recently doesn't seem anywhere near as serious as the split in the Republican party. First of all, this article is from Fox News, which will do anything it can to make the Democratic party seem weaker than it is. Democratic leaders seem to disagree with Obama on specific issues, such as the pipeline or a particular judicial appointee, but that doesn't necessarily signify a division in principle. So far, there is no trend to see here and nothing out of the ordinary at all.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ethan, the "rift" in the Democratic party does not seem nearly as serious as Fox News makes it up to be. However, it is something that needs to be fixed immediately because we do not need more opinions on capitol hill. More opinions mean more impasses, which is not what anyone wants.
ReplyDeleteIt seems like the Democratic party is looking to find a way to seem unified, even in a time when they must be split on issues to keep their seat in congress. The issues here do not represent what the Democratic party is at the core, so we cannot conclude that the party is fundamentally split. I do think Obama is pushing his agenda, but I don't think he believe there is no way of it passing. That would be a waste of his remaining time, so he want to push the bounds of what people think he can get done.
ReplyDeleteAs unproductive as it would be, it would be pretty cool to see two split parties. That makes 4 political parties going at it. That would be pretty sweet.
ReplyDeleteMore parties, more divisions, more loyalties, and more arguments that lead to a stand-still. That's what a Democratic division would lead to. Our government is already so polarized by loyalties that we can't compromise anymore. I think Ethan is right that the Democratic rift is much smaller than the Republican one, but any growth of it could lead to serious problems.
ReplyDelete