The Good Fight

The Attorney General for Washington State, Rob McKenna, has enrolled the state in the lawsuit against the recent health-care ovehaul effort. The state's Democratic establishment is, to somewhat understate things, hopping mad. (It's not shaping up to be a good first quarter for Governor Gregoire. The Attorney General isn't the only other elected official who's not being cooperative.)

Attorney General McKenna was on PBS yesterday, explaining his position. Of course, he was asked if he's against the reforms. This is to be expected, given that he's an elected Republican. In fact, Democratic fund-raising e-mails are thick on the ground, using McKenna's "rebellion" to soliciting funds. Admirably, the Attorney General refused to be baited, and calmly, if emphatically, explained that he felt that the Federal government calling for an individual mandate for citizens to purchase something from a private company on pain of penalty was simply outside of the powers that they had been granted in the Constitution. All in all it was very interesting, and it indirectly undermined a major Republican talking point - during one part of is argument Attorney General McKenna basically said that part of the reason that the individual mandate was unconstitutional was that it wasn't part of a government takeover of the health care system.

This argument makes perfect sense to me, even though I lack the Constitutional scholarship to evaluate its accuracy. But what I applaud the Attorney General for is not allowing himself to be pushed into the idea that a laudable goal should be allowed to trump the law. We all understand that it's possible to do something perfectly reprehensible while adhering to the letter, and possibly even the intent of the law. The flip side of this is that things that may be perfectly just, moral, ethical and necessary may be patently illegal.

The whole point behind the rule of law is that the rules are the important part - even if they become an impediment, there are rules and procedures for changing them other than the whim of rulers, or even the public at large. Our tolerance for bending or breaking the law when we feel that's warranted or required can lead us to some very bad places, all in the name of the greater good. So as much as the slog that was enacting health care got on my nerves (Is it just me, or can Democrats barely lead a horse to water?), if they have to through it again to get it right, so be it.

So fight on, Mister Attorney General. I don't know that I'm in your camp, but I applaud you for standing up for the rules.

Comfortably Dysfunctional

I was listening to this week's episode of This American Life. The topic was the joint venture between General Motors and Toyota, and basically, how GM as a company failed to learn the lessons of that venture, and the Toyota way of doing things, and how that helped lead them to only continuing to be a viable concern because of a massive infusion of capital from the federal government. One of the things that NPR automotive correspondent Frank Langfitt said during the piece really struck me. I don't claim to have a photographic memory, so I'm paraphrasing here, and hoping that I get it right, but he said something along the lines of that people at General Motors had become too comfortable with their roles in a dysfunctional relationship.

Yes, I know. It's nothing particularly profound, but upon hearing that, I suddenly had a phrase that put into words so many things that I had been seeing, and not really knowing how to talk about. Like most simple and elegant explanations, it effortlessly fit into so many different places. (Although, like simple and elegant explanations, it also runs the very real risk of being overused.)

In work, in politics, in society... it's really easy to see how things aren't working because so many of us have allowed ourselves to become comfortable with our roles in frighteningly dysfunctional relationships with each other. Politics, especially.

Tell me which side of the political spectrum the owner of this car considers themselves to be on.

Now, think about how long it might be before both sides of the aisle are driving around with this sentiment plastered on their back bumpers. Not that far in the future, is it? But that's only the tip of the iceberg. Your President. My President. Whatever happened to OUR President? Karl Rove may have demonstrated that running to 51% of the electorate while simultaneously ignoring and vilifying the other 49% to be a viable political strategy, but it's also showing itself to have been a catastrophically short-sighted one. The nature of politics is such that one expects a certain level of dysfunction between partisan members of the public and politicians of the other party. But when the relationship between the different ideological segments of the public is dysfunctional to the point of a rhetorical civil war, something has gone seriously off the rails.

And as the dysfunction grows and becomes more entrenched, people become more and more comfortable, not only with their role in the dysfunctional relationship, but with the idea that the relationship isn't dysfunctional enough. And so the dysfunction comes to be both a means to and end, and an end in and of itself - a desirable state that is to be sought after.

It would be easy to say that if dysfunction wins, we all lose. But that's not true. People are smart enough that someone will have positioned themselves to benefit if the rest of us self-destruct. (Or at least they think they have.) But I can't see how I'd manage that feat myself, so I'm pretty sure that if dysfunction wins, I lose. Which gives me an incentive to find either a way to benefit from the ongoing rancor, or a way to bring it to an end. Right now, I must admit that I'm at a loss as to how to do either. Which prevents me from being comfortable with my role in this relationship. I have no idea what I'm going to do about this. But I'm hoping that necessity will, once again, be the mother of invention, because, comfortably or not, we can't go on like this.

Falling Behind‏

While it's true that no matter how cynical one becomes, it's never enough to keep up, I've usually managed to stay within striking distance. But I quick round through the news this morning, and even with my cynicism flooring it, I find I'm being left in the dust.

Then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger halted a canonical trial against a priest who molested hundreds of boys in Wisconsin after receiving a letter from the molester pleading for leniency - after ignoring letters from the Archbishop of Milwaukee seeking to have the priest defrocked. No-one, however went to secular authorities with the information when the church failed to act.

A teenager whose family was on the Wife Swap television program is suing for one hundred million dollars, claiming that the scripted lines she was given made her look bad, and that she never consented to being on the show. The fact that both of her parents were recently convicted of felonies that have large fines attached has nothing to do with it, really.

Sore losers on the political Right have taken to threats and vandalism against members of Congress who voted for the health care overhaul bill. It seems that even the siblings of legislators have been threatened.

Sigh. I'm starting to think that the best course of action is to dust off and nuke the whole freaking planet from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

Against the Wind

In the Political Irony department.

Did you ever notice that politicians seem to always disdain those of their fellows that they view as too susceptible to the fickle winds of public opinion? I might have to go look into this, because I'm pretty sure that one of the very same people who are now allegedly hopping mad that passage of the health care overhaul bills "goes against the will of the people" has, at some point in their career, been one of those politicians who vowed not to let themselves be blown about by polls.

(Of course, the truth of the matter is that politicians are usually saying "I promise not to be swayed by opinion polls that would lead me to vote in ways that you, random member of the audience, don't like," which usually means that they'll studiously ignore anyone who voted for someone else.)

Cross Purposes

t seems that there are some things that never change - like the fact that in government, the left hand doesn't always know what the right hand is doing. In this case, the left hand is Democratic Governor Christine Gregoire, and the right hand is Republican Attorney General Rob McKenna, setting up Washington State government to be at war with itself. The basic conflict is a simple one. Attorney General McKenna believes that certain provisions of the health care overhaul bill recently signed into law are unconstitutional, and so joined the lawsuit lead by Florida. Governor Gregoire has no problems with the new law, and is upset that the Attorney General signed Washington up without consulting her.

Of course, the party affiliations of the actors is lost on no one, and the more politically active of Washington's citizens are lining up behind their sides, and (unsurprisingly) loudly denouncing each other. But like most such disputes, this one is generating a lot of heat, but no light, and seems likely to degenerate into a spate of internet-fueled name calling. Once the initial anger passes, the Governor and Attorney General are still parts of the same administration, and will likely mend fences enough to work together, leaving their followers to argue uselessly until the next elections.