So there is this tortoise who challenges his friend the hare to a race (stop me if you have heard this one). The race day comes around and after a sharp pistol-crack, the hare finds himself in an easy lead. Sure of victory, he decides to take a nap.
Plodding along with determination, the tortoise eventually surpasses his rival and handily beats the hare in one of the great upsets of Western Literature.
The message? Slow and steady wins the race; the deliberate deep-thinker will defeat the reckless boaster.
That is all well and good but voters made it clear last Tuesday that slow and steady doesn't win the political race. To them the last Congress, which was evenly balanced between Republicans and Democrats, failed to enact any major change. So to end the legislative stalemate, voters invited a Republican majority to both the House and the Senate. They want to see their government get something'anything, apparently'done.
There are three assumptions which seem to have motivated the political movements of last week. First, that decisive leadership is good leadership. Second, that progress is necessarily the opposite of gridlock. And third, that congressional Democrats were not getting the job done.
Of these assertions, the first and the second are dead wrong. The third is completely true.
In granting Republicans both Congress and the White House, the American public voiced their strong desire for some conclusive action to come out of Washington in the coming years. Yet while decisiveness in government can produce positive change, we should never forget that decisive leadership is nonetheless poor leadership if it makes poor decisions'no matter how quickly. The fact that gridlock on Capitol Hill officially ended last Tuesday may not be cause for celebration at all if it means that the country will simply continue in what may be the wrong direction, only now faster than before.
The question I'm really asking is: Do we want Congress to be a tortoise or a hare right now?
What Americans need is a legislature which considers tough issues with poise, not one which gets things done as quickly as possible. We ought to desire a deep-thinking Congress, not a rubber stamp.
The formerly balanced legislature, in retrospect, should be considered a resounding success because it was in practice a self-regulating system. It passed sweeping legislation on issues of national security at a time when decisive action was needed. But it withheld support from proposals about which there were serious concerns among the American people.
If there were any poetic moments in the last Congress, the narrow defeat of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge drilling plan was one of them. For the most part, Congress passed only what was needed; as it stands now, it is in serious danger of becoming a mouthpiece for the ruling party.
Be that as it may, conservatives should be applauded for the clarity with which they delivered their message in the days leading up to the elections. Although it traditionally caters more to America's pragmatists and opportunists, the Republican Party somehow managed to convince a substantial number of voters that it also welcomes idealists'turf which usually belongs, without question, to the Democrats. But it is true: The Republican Party does have a dream. It is a dream about national security, freedom and getting the bullies.
Democrats, it must be said, are neither here nor there'they are everywhere. Helplessly oscillating between following the president like ducks in a row and meekly chastising him for his audacity, they have become excessively moderate. And while they seem to have a few reasonable questions, when it comes to the answers - well, we might as well look to the stars. It is sad but fitting that, for Democrats, the most political event of the year was a funeral.
Excessively moderate or not, the Democratic stumbling block was the only thing keeping Republicans from becoming legislative invincibles. With the Democrats gone, Republican policy will rapidly become American policy. That is a freedom of action neither party should have.
So to answer my earlier question: Do we want a congressional tortoise, or a congressional hare?
Long live the tortoise.
