The Genius of Bipartisan Compromise

Nobody gets everything they want.

Nobody gets everything they need.

Problems get only partially addressed and then linger on for decades often getting worse and metastasizing into ever more complicated problems that are even less likely to be tackled by cowardly pols.

Frightening as it may be, this is actually one of the better case scenarios. The above is still better than not being addressed at all and benign neglect. So count your blessings that we live in the best system yet devised for human government.

A compromise was reached on the $1 trillion farm bill that has been in negotiation for 2 years

The bipartisan agreement, two years after lawmakers began work on the nearly $1 trillion bill, is a major step forward in reauthorizing hundreds of farm and nutrition programs that must be renewed every five years. And, at least for now, it brings an end to the partisan fighting that stalled two previous attempts to pass the legislation. The bill would reduce spending by about $23 billion over the next 10 years.

So the House GOP wanted to cut $40 billion from food stamps and drug test recipients. They voted against a bill that would only have cut $20 billion. The Dems in the Senate proposed cutting it $40 million to fulfill their role of self-compromising invertibrates.

Many Dems argued forcefully that any cuts to such an essential, life-sustaining program, in the midst of harrowing economic conditions, was irresponsible. But arguing about irresponsibility to a body that believes that people on the terrorist watch list should be able to purchase assault weapons is a pretty futile act.

So blah blah blah we need to be thankful that our fellow Americans who are food insecure will only have to endure, if it passes, an $800 million cut.

“The bill is a compromise,” said Ray Gaesser, an Iowa farmer who is president of the American Soybean Association. “It ensures the continued success of American agriculture, and we encourage both the House and the Senate to pass it quickly.”

Antihunger advocates criticized the agreement.

“They are gutting a program to provide food for hungry people to pay for corporate welfare,” said Joel Berg, executive director of the New York City Coalition Against Hunger.

Ain’t democracy grand? 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s