Thoughts regarding the government shutdown, this time around.
If National Park Rangers are considered non-essential, wouldn’t furloughing non-essential government workers include DOGE? And ICE?
With it shut down, how can the can the government possibly be any more inefficient?
Efficiency requires the ability to compare input and output. Perhaps, they should have been looking at “effective”, instead of “efficient”.
But, the good news is, with far, far, fewer non-essential workers it should be easier to find that waste, fraud, and abuse. I can’t believe DOGE didn’t notice all those “Non-essential” folks?
Hopefully, this administration looks in the mirror, because with this shutdown, it is very clear where the fraud and abuse is being generated.
When the government is shutdown, it isn’t as efficient (or effective) as it is when it is open.
Interestingly, the government shutdowns didn’t start occurring until the 1970’s. Since then, it has been deemed appropriate to use non-essential services as a bargaining tool (as if those impacted were nothing more than trading cards.)
Seems like before that time, both parties better understood what compromise, respect, diplomacy, and actually caring about the people, the constitution, and love of this country meant.
Negotiating a deal means sometimes collaborating and cooperating while working together. It doesn’t mean only agreeing if one party gets everything they want or demand.
For the betterment of the entire country, and not just one select group, it is that which is accomplished for the common good that matters most.
Compromise is to make a deal between different parties where each party gives up part of their demand. Not giving up anything, is not compromise.
This country wouldn’t even exist as is does today, without compromise. The existing bi-cameral form of government was a compromise by the founding fathers, to balance the concerns of smaller, less populated states vs. larger, more populated states. The 3/5th compromise between the southern slave states vs. the northern free states was another compromise, as well as the establishment of the Electoral College.
Sure, some would say look at what that got us. Some of those ideas were so terrible, and still are today. Yes, I totally agree – but at that time, those that realized the only way forward was to compromise.
Later, Amendments were passed based on compromise, along with many, many laws.
Compromise only works when both parties have an open mind to change. Staunch line in the sand, and digging in heels type behavior, does not allow room for compromise.
Compromise does require room, room to grow and share ideas. Sharing implies not being self centered, greedy, or selfish. Those are unhealthy moral principles that governance should avoid, if compromise is the goal to avoid governmental paralysis.
Let me be clear, I am only discussing compromise as it relates to governing, and not as it applies to each individual person. That type of practical, pragmatic, principled compromise is far, far different than the philosophy of compromise as it applies to governance.
In personal use, One should never compromise their morals, beliefs, and values unless those have so little meaning that one actually believes trading them for something less has no bearing to them.
The stronger the belief, the less chance that belief will be allowed to be compromised.
“Politics and Governance demand compromise”.
Barry Goldwater (from over 50 years ago)
And, it is so very true, even still today.
Ruminati 