No compromise? How about a trade-off?

Wednesday, April 10, 2013

The possibility of compromise with a "Grand Bargain" on critical national issues seems more remote with each passing day.

The reason is both simple and understandable.

People compromise on paint color or dinner choices but balk when it comes to issues of principle.

So let me propose a new approach.

We'll call it the "Grand Trade-off."

Here's how it works.

Let's say conservatives agree to support gay marriage across the land and end this divisive national debate.

The trade-off?

In return, the Democrats agree to abandon an amnesty plan for "undocumented workers" and permanently secure our borders with an iron fist.

Even trade?

Let's say the conservatives agree to universal gun control legislation that would fulfill the Democrat's utopian dream of a restricted weapon society.

In return, the Democrats agree to a balanced budget amendment by cutting federal spending along with no higher tax rates.

With those sticky issues resolved, let's keep trading.

Conservatives agree to allow this administration to spend billions of tax dollars on highly-questionable attempts to find "clean energy" that will address the folly of global warming.

In return, the liberals agree that these "green" expenditures will come from the elimination of the Department of Homeland Security and the Environmental Protection Agency.

See how this works?

Obamacare, voter ID requirements, entitlement reform - the list is long of potential trade-offs.

But a trade-off is far different than a compromise. A trade-off involves a total abandonment of a position for a favorable resolution on another issue.

And as with all things political, there's always plenty to dislike.

Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: