Of Fiscal Cliff, Compromises, and Republican Intransigence!

Mr. President: As the fiscal cliff and debt ceiling saga loom, don’t forget the encounter of December 2010, when Republicans members of Congress successfully tied the extension of unemployment benefits for displaced workers to the continuation of Bush tax cuts for the rich. Mr. President, Bush Tax Cuts is President George Bush’s baby – a Republican brainchild. Did it serve the intended purpose – creating jobs and revamping the economy since its inception? If the answer is yes - not if it has the potential – then it should be extended. On the other hand, if the tax cuts did not serve the intended or any beneficial purpose, Mr. President, with due respect, the extension should not be negotiated any further. That was the message of the election, and that was the mandate. 

Compromises should be negotiated based on its usefulness or values to the governed – creating jobs and revamping the economy. If Republicans bargaining conditions do not have the potential to create jobs, they should be rejected and discarded. Their goal is to impose austerity package on us. That was rejected at the poll.

Of what benefit, of what use agreeing to unproductive bargaining chips and conditions simply because our President wants to be seen or perceived as a consensus builder? Compromises should be mutually beneficial. At the poll, voters rejected Republican trickle-down economic philosophy, austerity measures, and convoluted taxation and socio-economic policies that are specifically designed to benefit only the privileged few. That was the mandate. 

It is about the middle class and those who are struggling to climb up the ladder en-route to greatness. It has always been exclusively about the unbridled corporate welfare package that makes the rich richer, while the economy remains stagnant. Why must government incentives put together to assist the less privileged in the society to move out of the poverty cycle be categorized as distribution of wealth or socialism? The interests and the basic needs of the governed - specifically the middle class and the forgotten poor - trump political expediency, corporate welfare and convoluted taxation package for the uber rich. That was the message of the election, and that was the mandate.

Finally, the right of all the people to the privacy of their bedrooms is sacrosanct, and it trumps whatever Republican has left of their ideological rigidity. They cannot possibly be rooting for small, lean and fiscally responsible government, and at the same time be poking their nose at what Americans are doing in the privacy of their own home. No, not now. That was the message of the election, and that was the mandate. Period.