Metal Gears

Process Versus Outcomes

Metal GearsI actually think that the way we go about (process) achieving goals (outcomes) matters. But, I probably generally believe that outcomes tip the scale and matter a bit more than the process. I mean, haven’t we all sat through meetings (process) where we felt like screaming, “Just make a decision, and let’s get on with doing it!”

So, the Democrats had enough. They finally got sick of the Republicans, the “Party of ‘No!'”, blocking absolutely everything from job creation legislation to executive appointments. They used a procedural move to terminate the use of filibuster to prevent executive appointments from moving forward.

This is a tricky issue for me.

While one of the points of the rules of the Senate is to force engaged compromise between the two parties, that hasn’t been going on for 6 years now. The process has been so broken by a sick and dying Republican party, that the Process of ceaseless obstruction has actually become the Outcome. To me, that’s simply not acceptable. The whole point of the process was to force engagement, not to block outcome.

If I’m forced to make a choice (was their decision to change the rules to end filibuster on executive appointments good or bad), I think I believe it was necessary. Time will tell if this body that operates on 200+ years of rules of precedent comes crumbling down.

The Party of ‘No!’ has got to go. Their ceaseless obstruction of the work of the people has gone on for 6 years now, and they have accomplished nothing while the nation suffers. As a result, the minority has been holding the majority hostage for 6 years. This is not how I define “doing their jobs!” Enough is enough.

I believe, as I’ve posted before, that the US needs at least 2 healthy political parties. Right now, we don’t have that.

The Republican party, in my opinion, needs to rebuild itself from the ground up. Until they do so, they need to go rather than run the country via hostage taking.

2 thoughts on “Process Versus Outcomes”

  1. I think our fundamental law was very much about process in that the framers, being unable to resolve questions of allocating power (states vrs federal, congress vrs presidency, etc) agreed to a structure they thought would make these unending and unanswerable arguments. Kicking the can eternally down the road would, as process, secure the government from usurpation as a pendulum swings back and forth. They did not envision parties (factions) although they appeared almost immediately. Should one branch of government or one party achieve unassailable dominance then there is very grave danger of degenerating into a fascist or tyrannical funnel whose walls grow steeper and steeper until civil discourse becomes impossible. This is a worry for me.

Comments are closed.