Skip Navigation
Derek Thompson

Derek Thompson - Derek Thompson is a senior editor at The Atlantic, where he oversees business coverage for the website.
More

He is a visiting research fellow at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget at the New America Foundation. Derek has also written for Slate, BusinessWeek, and the Daily Beast. He has appeared as a guest on radio and television networks, including NPR, the BBC, CNBC, and MSNBC.

Why the Bipartisan Jobs Bill Was Bound to Fail

By Derek Thompson
Feb 12 2010, 11:55 AM ET Comment

The bipartisan jobs bill crafted by Sens. Max Baucus and Charles Grassley immediately faced a flurry of angry Democratic lawmakers who want more direct spending and fewer tax cuts. Dem ringleader Harry Reid broadly dismissed the plan as larded with tax breaks, and told TIME magazine he has the caucus' "blessing" to reject the bill, but keep the hiring tax credit.

This would all be very disappointing on some level if it weren't so predictable.



Just this week I wrote that I could see the jobs bill's bipartisanship evolving like this: Republicans ask for broad tax cuts to stimulate job growth. Democrats say that's not sufficient to create jobs. Republicans say they can't make a deal. Democrats go it alone, and Republicans counter every proposal with: "This is more of the same old failed policies from Democrats, who are spending our way into a bottomless hole and tragically burdening on our children with debt without doing a thing create jobs." Turns out that's pretty much what's happening...

___

I also wanted to add a short rant:

White House Press Sec. Robert Gibbs is still saying stuff like this: "The American people want to see Washington put aside partisan differences and make progress on jobs." This sounds so old to me.

Is anybody else tired of the idea that partisan differences are something we expect anybody to "put aside" when they start debating important legislation? To be sure, debates over important legislation sound like precisely the time it's in everybody's interest to speak their mind. "Partisan differences" are what makes parties different. The phrase is an antagonizing euphemism for "what people think."

You can criticize the filibuster for putting a TRIMAX wheel lock on legislation, or the absurd proliferation of Republican holds, which are obstructionist beyond any reasonable definition of partisan. But this obsessive focus on bipartisanship for the purpose of bipartisanship only fetishizes something that Americans begin to value, and expect, and demand and neither party expects to work.

Presented by

More at The Atlantic

The Fraught Mobile Politics of the United States of Amercia [Sic] The Fraught Mobile Politics of Amercia [Sic]
Sex Selection in America: Why It Persists and How We Can Change It The Right Way to Fight Sex Selection
For the St. Louis Art Museum, a Legal Victory Raises Ethical Questions St. Louis Museum's Legal Victory Raises Ethical Questions
The Rock-Mining Children of Sierra Leone Have Not Found Peace 10 Years After Civil War, No Peace for Sierra Leone's Kids
The Edwards Trial: A Bad Idea From Before the Start The Edwards Trial: A Massive Waste of Time

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.
blog comments powered by Disqus
View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

Afghanistan: May 2012

Jun 1, 2012

Subscribe Now

SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY

Facebook

Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free newsletters

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)