In 1993, Bill Clinton swept into office with a Democratic majority in both the House and Senate. His attempt to pass a controversial health-care bill failed but generated enough of a backlash that the Republicans took over both houses of Congress in 1995.
In 2001, George H.W. Bush entered the White House with Republicans in control of both houses. The events of 9/11 muted criticism of Bush for a time, but by 2007 Democrats had taken over Congress.
In 2009, Barack Obama became president and Democrats held both houses of Congress. He succeeded where Clinton failed in passing a health-care bill, but Republicans took over the House in 2011 and the senate in 2015.
Pundits say that Americans like to have the party in the White House be a different party from the one running Congress. But, in fact, Americans are angry at the gridlock that results. So why do they vote that way?
I think the answer is that the party that takes over is so full of itself that it overreaches, which has the effect of polarizing the other side. The party in power would be better off taking small steps that lead to genuine results rather than try to take large steps that either can’t be achieved (Hillarycare) or that create more problems than they solve (Obamacare).
Numbers of natural tips as well as herbal supplements, for example Lawax capsule can cure premature raindogscine.com levitra properien ejaculation effectively. Therefore, Musli Kaunch capsules and Spermac capsules are highly efficient in dealing with different ED complications arising as post-surgery effects. canada cialis 100mg Did you know that the human body has the intrinsic power to heal itself? However, because of the pressure cialis pills wholesale that is obstructing the proper flow of signals, such ability is also disrupted. The anemia occurs because the body no india online viagra longer can absorb vitamin B12 due to a lack of a key stomach factor, destroyed by the chronic inflammation. A case in point is the Department of the Interior, a highly visible agency that has proven to be a lightning rod for both sides. Ronald Reagan’s appointment of James Watt as Secretary of the Interior helped build the environmental movement in the 1980s because environmental groups used Watt as their leading fundraising tool. They in turn used those funds to stymie just about everything Watt wanted to do with the public lands.
Now rumor has it that Trump is considering Sarah Palin for Secretary of the Interior, though an oil company executive named Forrest Lucas seems a bit more likely (Lucas contributed $50,000 to Mike Pence’s gubernatorial campaigns). What a great way for environmental groups to rebuild their memberships!
As Secretary, either Palin or Lucas would be likely to try to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil exploration and extraction. Bush tried this in 2001 and the environmentalists successfully prevented it. Instead of going after the most controversial piece of ground in the nation, Bush should have–and Trump should–start with opening less controversial areas to show that oil development is compatible with wildlife and other resources.
In the same way, instead of controversial figures like Palin or Lucas, Trump should ask Gary Johnson to be Secretary of the Interior. As a former western governor, Johnson is more familiar with public lands than Lucas. As a dedicated free marketeer, Johnson won’t be committed to one resource over all others; instead, he will try to find ways to maximize the value of all of them together.
Johnson’s Libertarian candidacy shouldn’t make him unacceptable, but if it does, how about current Arizona Governor Doug Ducey? As former CEO of Cold Stone Creamery Republican, Ducey isn’t identified with one natural resource or another. As a fiscally conservative Republican, Ducey should fit right in with Trump’s agenda.
Whoever is picked should focus on maximizing the value of public lands, partly by maximizing returns they produce for the Treasury. This will mean convincing Congress to give public land agencies, including the Forest Service, the authority to charge more user fees. It will mean more oil & gas drilling, but instead of focusing on controversial areas, the new secretary should start with some demonstration projects to show it can make resource extraction compatible with conservation. If Audubon allows oil wells on one of its wildlife refuges and the Nature Conservancy allows timber cutting on its conservation lands, the United States should be able to do similar demonstration projects on public lands.
Who would be your choice for Transportation Secretary?
Good take today Mr. O’Toole. The political pendulum is feeling more like a sledgehammer these days.
I agree that a non-polarizing person would be best.
However, no matter who Trump choses ( unless he unconscionably allows Clinton or Obama to make the pick for him), the other side will attack, make false claims and polarize the appointee for anything and everything. That’s what they do.