# what do the Republicans have to negotiate with? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 9, 2013, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768 "2013-10-09T13:47:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/241 "2013-10-10T14:28:04Z")
I am sure we are all grateful for friend **Bricker** ’s valiant and ceaseless efforts on behalf of precise semantic distinctions. ---
**Author:** ![Donald\_Rump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Donald\_Rump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donald_Rump)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/242 "2013-10-10T14:31:50Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Because it isn’t only a behind-closed-doors talking/handshaking session, like a simple negotiation. This way, they’re causing real damage to real people who aren’t even part of the discussion for them. That isn’t negotiation, that’s hostage-taking. But I don’t see any principled reason to label one side but not the other as engaging in “hostage taking,” insofar as both Obama and the GOP have it in their power to end the shutdown by agreeing to the other side’s demands, and this is all being done in accordance with process. Now, many would say that this is drawing a false equivalence. But why is it false, exactly? A good expression of the notion that this draws a false equivalence is this speech by Lincoln cited by [James Fallows](http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/09/the-idiocy-of-the-shutdown-in-3-acts-map-thought-experiment-speech/280141/): > [@](#): > > Your purpose, then, plainly stated, is that you will destroy the Government, unless you be allowed to construe and enforce the Constitution as you please, on all points in dispute between you and us. You will rule or ruin in all events. This, plainly stated, is your language… > > In that supposed event, you say, you will destroy the Union; and then, you say, the great crime of having destroyed it will be upon us! That is cool. A highwayman holds a pistol to my ear, and mutters through his teeth, “Stand and deliver, or I shall kill you, and then you will be a murderer!” > > To be sure, what the robber demanded of me - my money - was my own; and I had a clear right to keep it; but it was no more my own than my vote is my own; and the threat of death to me, to extort my money, and the threat of destruction to the Union, to extort my vote, can scarcely be distinguished in principle…. > > Let us be diverted by none of those sophistical contrivances wherewith we are so industriously plied and belabored - contrivances such as groping for some middle ground between the right and the wrong… But a highwayman has no legal claim to my property, so clearly HE’S the one who would be culpable for my death if I refused his demands and he killed me, even though I had it in my power to stop him; whereas, on the other hand, the House GOP clearly has a legal right to hold up the functioning of the government if that’s what they, in their twisted worldview, desire. (Unless the argument is that in so doing they’re literally destroying the country, which seems a bit much to me.) So I just don’t see how the claim of false equivalence holds water. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/243 "2013-10-10T14:34:26Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > I am sure we are all grateful for friend **Bricker** ’s valiant and ceaseless efforts on behalf of precise semantic distinctions. _sigh_ “The Republicans are not negotiating!” “Yes, they are; you may not like the circumstances, but it’s obviously negotiating.” “Oh, who cares about semantics?” Do you actually have any interest, even a tiny bit, in that whole “fighting ignorance” thing? I’m amazed at how confident and secure you are in the middle of announcing you don’t care about it. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/244 "2013-10-10T14:40:21Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > _sigh_ > > “The Republicans are not negotiating!” > > “Yes, they are; you may not like the circumstances, but it’s obviously negotiating.” > > “Oh, who cares about semantics?” > > Do you actually have any interest, even a tiny bit, in that whole “fighting ignorance” thing? I’m amazed at how confident and secure you are in the middle of announcing you don’t care about it. By your definition, Obama is negotiating, because he communicated his position to the Republicans. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/245 "2013-10-10T14:46:14Z")
> [@Donald\_Rump](#): > > But I don’t see any principled reason to label one side but not the other as engaging in “hostage taking,” insofar as both Obama and the GOP have it in their power to end the shutdown by agreeing to the other side’s demands, and this is all being done in accordance with process. False equivalence. Keeping a law that has been duly passed in accordance with process is not simply “Obama’s demand”. It’s the law. Crippling or killing that law, outside the process and with only minority support among We the People, is the GOP’s demand. They also control only one half of one branch of the government, and that only with minority support, so they cannot honestly be said to be of equal standing. Does that help clarify things for you? > [@](#): > > the House GOP clearly has a legal right to hold up the functioning of the government if that’s what they, in their twisted worldview, desire. There’s a bit more to it than legal rights, isn’t there? There’s moral rights, and there’s a helluva lot of responsibility issues involved too. Try addressing those and see where you get. ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Fun\_Ball](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_fun_ball/32/17664_2.png) [@Happy\_Fun\_Ball](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Fun_Ball)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/246 "2013-10-10T14:53:56Z")
> [@Donald\_Rump](#): > > I’m on the same page as you ideologically here, but isn’t the shutdown precisely what they bring to the negotiating table? Why should that item be excluded from “[that which] the Republicans have to negotiate with” as referenced in the title of this thread? Maybe I’m missing something here. As distasteful as it is to me that they’re using this as a bargaining chip to achieve ends that I find equally distasteful, how does this not qualify as negotiation (or hard bargaining) in the ordinary sense of the word? The problem is that it does not incent the Democrats to bargain. The choices the Republicans have offered seem to be either: 1. We shut down the government and do lots of damage to the national economy while we (the Republicans) take a larger share of the blame. Or: 1. You agree to defund or delay a law that we (the Republicans) will continue to try to dismantle every step of the way and if we succeed you (the Democrats) will take a huge hit to your credibility. That’s it. Nothing else. They are not offering to have a long term (3 year) raise to the debt ceiling. No offer to not to do this same thing again in 2 or 12 months. No offers to raise some tax revenue or an offer to institute universal background checks for firearm purchases. No offers to stop filibustering President Obama’s judicial appointments. Nothing. There is arguably no reason for the Democrats to negotiate yet Republicans seem to be apoplectic that the President won’t negotiate. It’s pretty dumb and not well thought out. That is my whole point. > [@Bricker](#): > > The larger point is, in my opinion, pretty well settled. The only real weapon in the GOP’s arsenal is the budget and the related issue of the debt ceiling, and they appear to be willing to destroy the village in order to “save” it. > > But that’s fairly described as “negotiation,” albeit with high stakes and misguided aims. If the shutdown was blamed on President Obama or the Senate Democrats, it might be a good negotiation tactic because they would have something to bargain with: the continued electoral of the Democratic Party. As it is, they are hurting themselves more than the Democrats in this regard so the only thing they are negotiating with is damage to the country and potentially the full faith and credit of our financial agreements if they refuse to raise the debt ceiling. While I agree with you that this is a legal and valid negotiation tactic, it does smell of hostage taking or extortion because they have no stance except “_we will burn down the village unless we get our way_”. If you have a better descriptor for this tactic that is not so pejorative yet still captures the irrationality of their strategy, I am happy to use it. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/247 "2013-10-10T15:07:34Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Any Republican who votes to humiliate the party by capitulating to Democrat intransigence right now is going to have extremely hard time getting re-elected. Guaranteed. And they know it. **[U.S. House Republicans weigh debt limit hike without add-ons](http://finance.yahoo.com/news/u-house-republicans-weigh-debt-143118245.html)** > [@](#): > > U.S. House of Representatives Republicans are weighing a short-term debt limit increase with no added policy changes, such as deficit-reduction requirements, according to a source with knowledge of the discussions. > > The source, who asked not to be identified, said the initiative gained steam after the conservative Heritage Foundation think tank began pushing for this kind of straightforward debt limit increase, albeit a short-term one, that Democrats have been insisting upon. > > If such a bill moves forward in the House it would represent a major shift in position. Can you talk your Tea Party friends into primarying all the Republicans that vote for this? Please??? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/248 "2013-10-10T15:11:26Z")
Just to add, since you’re somehow finding the issue to be based in property law of all things: The United States government, and its proper functioning, is indeed the “property” of We the People. Many of Us the People are in fact losing some value in that property through the Republicans’ actions. ---
**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:** [October 10, 2013, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/249 "2013-10-10T15:27:28Z")
> [@Donald\_Rump](#): > > I’m on the same page as you ideologically here, but isn’t the shutdown precisely what they bring to the negotiating table? Why should that item be excluded from “[that which] the Republicans have to negotiate with” as referenced in the title of this thread? Maybe I’m missing something here. As distasteful as it is to me that they’re using this as a bargaining chip to achieve ends that I find equally distasteful, how does this not qualify as negotiation (or hard bargaining) in the ordinary sense of the word? The problem is that the chip the Republicans are offering, letting the government function, is not (or at least, should not be) purely a Democratic desire. I’m sure Republicans want the government open, too; parts of it, anyway. That’s why I think the comparison to hostage taking is valid. Imagine the cliché scene of a bank robber, surrounded by police, using a teller as a human shield and holding a gun to her head. He probably doesn’t want to kill the teller, but he’ll threaten to do it in order to get what he really wants (the money). He’s counting on the fact that the police want to keep the teller alive more than he does. And he’s certainly hoping that their desire to keep the teller alive is greater than their desire to apprehend him and save the bank’s money. I said earlier that the Senate (Democrats) could have passed a CR with their own legislative wishlist attached. “Pass an assault weapons ban, or we’ll shut down the government!” That would have put them in an equivalent bargaining position with the Republicans. But they didn’t. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/250 "2013-10-10T15:28:45Z")
It is with heavy steps and a heavier heart that I surrender. My humiliation is abject and bottomless, I should never have dared to contend with someone who’s capacity for relentlessly precise semantic parsing is the stuff of legend. Alas, I am undone! I will go now to the river, to perform the ancient Albanian ritual of self-abasement, accompanied by a chorus of bitter virgins, intoning dirges of woe and humiliation. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/251 "2013-10-10T15:28:56Z")
Bricker would you say the Republicans are negotiating in good faith? They want long term changes to existing laws for a 6 week continuing resolution. They want changes to laws that they failed to defeat by the vote, in exchange for simply allowing the government to function. There is absolutely nothing that will prevent them from asking for further changes and more concessions on Dec 15 when this CR runs out. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/252 "2013-10-10T15:33:52Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > By your definition, Obama is negotiating, because he communicated his position to the Republicans. Absolutely. Did I ever suggest otherwise? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/253 "2013-10-10T15:41:33Z")
> [@L. G. Butts](#): > > If the shutdown was blamed on President Obama or the Senate Democrats, it might be a good negotiation tactic because they would have something to bargain with: the continued electoral of the Democratic Party. As it is, they are hurting themselves more than the Democrats in this regard so the only thing they are negotiating with is damage to the country and potentially the full faith and credit of our financial agreements if they refuse to raise the debt ceiling. While I agree with you that this is a legal and valid negotiation tactic, it does smell of hostage taking or extortion because they have no stance except “_we will burn down the village unless we get our way_”. If you have a better descriptor for this tactic that is not so pejorative yet still captures the irrationality of their strategy, I am happy to use it. Well, if we’re now down to what the tactic _smells_ like, then I agree with you. To quote Baby Herman, “The whole thing stinks like yesterday’s diapers!” I’m not supporting the tactic – I’m just asking that it be described correctly. The SDMB seems to react poorly to this, seemingly feeling that if something is bad, any descriptions of it, be they accurate or not, are allowed; any objections to accuracy constitute a defense of the predicate issue. It is neither hostage taking nor extortion. The only arrow in the GOP quiver is the passage of the budget – they cannot repeal Obamacare outright without two-thirds of both legislative houses. Since they don’t have that, they are using the control they do have to demand its undoing, or at least its delay. I don’t understand why we are seemingly incapable of describing it like that. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/254 "2013-10-10T15:41:50Z")
If that’s all settled then, perhaps we can move on to less significant issues, like the fate of the Republic? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/255 "2013-10-10T15:42:53Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > Bricker would you say the Republicans are negotiating in good faith? They want long term changes to existing laws for a 6 week continuing resolution. They want changes to laws that they failed to defeat by the vote, in exchange for simply allowing the government to function. > > There is absolutely nothing that will prevent them from asking for further changes and more concessions on Dec 15 when this CR runs out. Sure, I think it’s in good faith, if by that phrase you mean they really want what they’re asking for. If you mean something else by “in good faith,” then you’ll need to describe it in more detail. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/256 "2013-10-10T15:44:10Z")
I guess not. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/257 "2013-10-10T15:47:01Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > It is neither hostage taking nor extortion. The only arrow in the GOP quiver is the passage of the budget – they cannot repeal Obamacare outright without two-thirds of both legislative houses. Since they don’t have that, they are using the control they do have to demand its undoing, or at least its delay. I don’t understand why we are seemingly incapable of describing it like that. What you are describing is hostage-taking and extortion. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/258 "2013-10-10T15:51:23Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Upon reading this I got a violent headache. Now my nose is bleeding a little. Is that normal ? I may not be the person to ask about “normal”. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/259 "2013-10-10T15:56:23Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > What you are describing is hostage-taking and extortion. … and nowhere in it is there any recognition of the fact that the debate over ACA was already held, the GOP had ample chance to persuade us of their position on it, they had to resort to a campaign of lies, they still lost, the bill was passed by a majority of democratically-elected representatives and a democratically-elected President, it was even found constitutional by SCOTUS despite their efforts to kill it that way, and the law was affirmed by an election based largely on it. So what they’re doing isn’t negotiation at all. That’s been done and it’s _over_. They _lost_. They can keep trying to make the case in future elections if they like, but they’re going to lose then, too. This is not negotiation, it’s refusal to understand and accept the basic validity of electoral democracy _itself_. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2013, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768/260 "2013-10-10T16:12:40Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I’m not supporting the tactic – I’m just asking that it be described correctly. The SDMB seems to react poorly to this, seemingly feeling that if something is bad, any descriptions of it, be they accurate or not, are allowed; any objections to accuracy constitute a defense of the predicate issue. > > It is neither hostage taking nor extortion. The only arrow in the GOP quiver is the passage of the budget – they cannot repeal Obamacare outright without two-thirds of both legislative houses. Since they don’t have that, they are using the control they do have to demand its undoing, or at least its delay. I don’t understand why we are seemingly incapable of describing it like that. The thing is, I think extortion is a kind of negotiation. The distinction I draw is between extortionism and negotiation in good faith. A good-faith negotiator says, “See this thing I have and that I like having? I’ll give it up. In exchange, that thing you have and that you like having? I want you to give it up.” The negotiation occurs around the issue of exactly how much each person gives up. That’s not how this works. In this case, Republicans are saying, “See this thing that we both can destroy but that EVERYONE WANTS? I’ll decline to destroy it. In exchange, that thing you have and that like having? I want you to give it up.” It’s a fundamentally different dynamic from a good-faith negotiation. Do you agree? For one thing, as others have pointed out, the only thing stopping Democrats from doing the same thing (threatening to destroy the thing that everyone wants) is something akin to decency. I hesitate to use that term to describe politicians, but I’m not sure what else works. For another thing, when you say Republicans have nothing else in their quiver, you’re clearly incorrect. Think of all the things that Republicans have and like having: low tax rates, strict responses to immigration, etc. All of those are arrows in their quiver. Do you agree? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-the-republicans-have-to-negotiate-with/670768.md?page=14)