The Fiscal Cliff - Whose to Blame

For the past 24 hours I've heard many people upset with the Fiscal Cliff deal.  Conservatives argue that the deal singles out one group.  Liberals argue that the president, and the Democrat caucuses in House and Senate, sold out their ideals. Debt Hawks are upset that the deal doesn't address spending.  Non-profit groups are angered that deductions are being phased out, and that could hurt charitable donations.  Who's to blame? We the People are.

For years we have declared "CHANGE", and our response has been to send largely the same mix back to office.  We rewarded the same group who have not passed a budget for four years (and counting) with the same jobs they've held.  We have expected a group who disagree about everything, posture in front of any camera and microphone in the area, and demonize others, to come together and compromise.

A group who we expect to make laws on our behalf have special rules for themselves.  They provide a second healthcare system, grant themselves lifetime benefits the rest of us don't get, and they exempt themselves from of the same laws they demand us to adhere.  Until recently, insider trading was even allowed, giving the incentive for some to pass laws and appropriations by which they could directly profit.

This last election cycle we rewarded two Congressmen, one who was being treated for "undisclosed emotional issues" and another who was running for the Vice Presidency, with overwhelming majorities to their own seat.

Our message to Washington was "more of the same." We didn't want quick action, and that's why we sent a fractured government back.  We demanded compromise, and we demanded it during critical times. And now we have a compromise which few are pleased.

So, who's to blame?  We are.  We expect the same people term after term after term to act like adults and negotiate.  We demand solutions from the fractured group we elect.  We permit false "mandates" to become the talking points of the day.

What's the solution? I don't know. Third Parties seem to be little more than the Last Hurrah for has-beens that didn't cut it in the Two-Party System. Expecting those elected to fully work on behalf of another has been a punchline to a bad comedy routine. Legislated term limits, if it could be passed, would just encourage more of the same, as there would be no incentive for the outgoing office holders to negotiate.

Here are my proposals.  We actually have term limits; they're called "elections," and I argue we use them and use them frequently. We have and overabundance of information on every candidate; we need to educate ourselves on every candidate.  We have a process (the caucus/primary) to replace those not acting in our best interest; become actively involved. We the People need to fully utilitze these tools.

What is the lesson of the Fiscal Cliff deal?  We the People must be involved and hold our representatives accountable.  Until then, expect more of the same.