# The Republican Obstructionist Tactic **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 26, 2010, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-republican-obstructionist-tactic/530577 "2010-02-26T22:35:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2010, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-republican-obstructionist-tactic/530577/41 "2010-02-28T20:58:44Z")
> [@sleeping](#): > > Invocations of cloture, 1947 to 2008: > > [Demo Wild Bounty Rupiah PG Soft Gratis Via Akun Pragmatic Play Demo Gacor Maxwin X1000](http://www.ldjackson.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Cloture_Voting_U_S__Senate_1947_to_2008.jpg) > > Check out the increase around 1993-1994, and surge in 2007-2008. Gee, what a coincidence… ---
**Author:** ![Lakai](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9de0a6/32.png) [@Lakai](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lakai)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2010, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-republican-obstructionist-tactic/530577/42 "2010-03-01T03:48:04Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Yeah, right. They’re going back to it now because the people now holding the bag for all the deficits from the Bush Administration, and all the additional deficit spending to address the economic catastrophe brought on by the Bush Administration, are Democrats. > > If Republicans really had principled objections to increasing the deficit, they’d have voted Republican deficit spenders out of office back in 2004. Republican credibility as deficit hawks has by now completely evaporated. > [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > I agree with **Kimstu**. “Not adding to the deficit” is a talking point that Republicans abandon when it’s their turn at the trough. It’s been that way for 30 years. Hell, for every Republican president that spends us into the poorhouse, their deluded voters become even more convinced that they’re the party to set things right. Maybe we have different definitions of obstructionism, but IMO, fighting for policies your constituents want isn’t obstructionist. I don’t care if it’s not a principled stance, but a purely political one. They are doing what the voters want them to do, so they can’t be obstructionist. What if Democrats proposed spending cuts and the Republicans voted against them? Would you call that obstructionist? If you would, then Republicans would be obstructing whenever they vote against democrats no matter which way the vote on spending. That seems like a biased way to define obstructionism, no? ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2010, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-republican-obstructionist-tactic/530577/43 "2010-03-01T04:04:32Z")
> [@Lakai](#): > > I don’t care if it’s not a principled stance, but a purely political one. Hey, you’re the one who brought it up. You said it was one of the “core Republican beliefs”. Now you say you don’t care why they’re doing it. > [@](#): > > They are doing what the voters want them to do, so they can’t be obstructionist. Sure they can. The Republicans showed no inclination to listen to these people when they were in power, so why start now? It looks for all the world like obstructionism, and when questioned they throw up their hands and say “just following the will of the voters.” ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2010, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-republican-obstructionist-tactic/530577/44 "2010-03-01T04:07:02Z")
> [@Lakai](#): > > They are doing what the voters want them to do, so they can’t be obstructionist. In the great political satire _Yes, Minister_, when the Prime Minister wished to rationalize some craven and cowardly decision, he’d say “The people have elected me. I am their leader. I must follow them.” ---
**Author:** ![Lakai](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9de0a6/32.png) [@Lakai](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lakai)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2010, 5:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-republican-obstructionist-tactic/530577/45 "2010-03-01T05:10:32Z")
> [@](#): > > Sure they can. The Republicans showed no inclination to listen to these people when they were in power, so why start now? It looks for all the world like obstructionism, and when questioned they throw up their hands and say “just following the will of the voters.” We’re just arguing over definitions now. I think we can both agree that Republican politicians don’t really care about deficits. Just look at Dick “deficits don’t matter” Cheney. I just don’t think it’s fair to call them obstructionists when they finally decide to do something that the voters want them to do. As a politician the least you can do is to follow the will of the people. No matter what your beliefs are, when you do that at least you’re doing what you were elected to do. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2010, 5:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-republican-obstructionist-tactic/530577/46 "2010-03-01T05:37:31Z")
> [@Lakai](#): > > We’re just arguing over definitions now. I think we can both agree that Republican politicians don’t really care about deficits. Just look at Dick “deficits don’t matter” Cheney. > > I just don’t think it’s fair to call them obstructionists when they finally decide to do something that the voters want them to do. As a politician the least you can do is to follow the will of the people. No matter what your beliefs are, when you do that at least you’re doing what you were elected to do. They are using a tactic that allows a minority of Senators to over rule a majority of elected Senators. This tactic was little used in the past, and was part of the “gentlemens’ club” tradition of the Senate. If used to the degree that it is now, there will never again an effective government. If the Democrats are a minority again at some point they could block every single one of President Palin’s cabinet and Supreme Court Justice nominations, they could refuse to pass a budget, or certify new Senators, or allocate funds the next time a natural disaster hits Crackerville. California and Massachusetts and the other states conservatives hate would do fine, as the less money they send to DC the less the conservative leach states will get back in disproportional spending. Imagine how popular Senators will be in their home state if they can’t get pork barrel funds for the NASCAR museum or the “loan a set of teeth for the wedding picture” service. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2010, 5:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-republican-obstructionist-tactic/530577/47 "2010-03-01T05:48:34Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > In the great political satire _Yes, Minister_, when the Prime Minister wished to rationalize some craven and cowardly decision, he’d say “The people have elected me. I am their leader. I must follow them.” It’s originally attributed to French radical Alexandre Ledru-Rollin. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2010, 6:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-republican-obstructionist-tactic/530577/48 "2010-03-01T06:16:35Z")
> [@Lakai](#): > > I just don’t think it’s fair to call them obstructionists when they finally decide to do something that the voters want them to do. 1. If they only listen to the will of the people when it’s convenient for them, they’re not really listening. 2. Just how strong is this fiscal conservative movement among the voters? They get a lot of news coverage, but that doesn’t mean there’s a lot of them. Is this the will of a majority of Republicans’ constituents, or just a very vocal minority? 3. If you’re so gung ho about a senator following the will of his constituents, shouldn’t the Senate, as a whole, follow the will of a majority of its members? A majority of senators, elected by majorities in their states, want things to go forward. Isn’t blocking that the very definition of obstructionism? ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2010, 6:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-republican-obstructionist-tactic/530577/49 "2010-03-01T06:19:54Z")
> [@](#): > > What am I missing here? That obstructionism is in the eye of the beholder, and it all depends on whether it’s your gore getting oxed, or your ox getting gored. -XT ---
**Author:** ![Lakai](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/9de0a6/32.png) [@Lakai](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lakai)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2010, 7:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-republican-obstructionist-tactic/530577/50 "2010-03-01T07:52:03Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > 1. If they only listen to the will of the people when it’s convenient for them, they’re not really listening. That doesn’t mean they’re obstructionist. I think that being obstructive implies that you are blocking legislation unreasonably, not disingenuously. It’s reasonable for a politician to be disingenuous as long as he does what the people want. I don’t think it’s unreasonable for politicians to be disingenuous. The profession calls on people to take views that they don’t believe in from time to time. If you think that being disingenuous in politics automatically makes you an obstructionist, then we aren’t going to agree here. > [@](#): > > 1. Just how strong is this fiscal conservative movement among the voters? They get a lot of news coverage, but that doesn’t mean there’s a lot of them. Is this the will of a majority of Republicans’ constituents, or just a very vocal minority? Are you saying most conservatives aren’t financial conservatives? Conservative people don’t agree with added to the deficit. Conservatives might disagree on what constitutes too much, but they all can agree that a 900 billion dollar health care program is over the limit. > [@](#): > > 1. If you’re so gung ho about a senator following the will of his constituents, shouldn’t the Senate, as a whole, follow the will of a majority of its members? A majority of senators, elected by majorities in their states, want things to go forward. Isn’t blocking that the very definition of obstructionism? A Senator’s job is to do what’s best for the people in his State, not the whole country. That’s the way the Senate was designed. So that the interests of the majority in large states doesn’t shut out the regional interests of small states. I’m not gung ho about them following the will of their constituents, I just think there is nothing obstructionist about it. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2010, 9:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-republican-obstructionist-tactic/530577/51 "2010-03-01T09:09:19Z")
There _is_ something obstructionist about it when the will of the governing body – in this case, the Senate – is overturned. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2010, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-republican-obstructionist-tactic/530577/52 "2010-03-25T00:03:58Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > …They compromise where they can, then try to stop the other side if they can’t compromise. > > So citing any specific instance of obstructionism doesn’t make the point of the OP, which claimed they are “shouting down everything”, even if they like it, and then said that this is causing the government to be unable to function. He then repeated that they were shutting everything down… So, can we accurately say obstructionism is an official Republican tactic [now](http://www.salon.com/news/healthcare_reform/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2010/03/24/senate)? If not, how long does this “no committee hearings” have to go on in the Senate for it to qualify as pure obstructionism? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-republican-obstructionist-tactic/530577.md?page=2)