Danforth: Compromise needed in US politics

Friday, June 15, 2012

ST. LOUIS (AP) — Former U.S. Sen. John Danforth says “government is broken” because of the uncompromising nature of today’s partisan politics.

The former Republican senator from Missouri retired in 1995 and was known as a political moderate during his 18 years in Washington. But Danforth says the political center has collapsed and “compromise” has become a dirty word among Republicans and Democrats.

Yet Danforth says compromise is exactly what’s needed to fix the U.S. government. He says Republicans need to abandon the idea of no new taxes, and Democrats need to agree to substantial changes in entitlement programs.

Danforth spoke Thursday night at a joint meeting of the Bar Association of Metropolitan St. Louis and the Judicial Learning Center.

More like this story

Littleinvestor 11 months, 1 week ago

Danforth will be vilified by both the GOP and Democrats. The hatred running through our political discourse probably will destroy this country if it hasn't already.

GrumpyGus 11 months, 1 week ago

Its not hatred, its fatigue that no one in power will fix the real problem. You are operating from an assumption that Danforth is correct. In my opinion, based on the reasons I have stated, he is as wrong as can be.

tonto_goldberg 11 months, 1 week ago

I don't think so, and this country is stronger than that. Jophn Danforth was and still is one of the few "adults in the room" which means "good guy" to anyone who wants the government to actually work on behalf of the people.

The small but growing list of GOP members from Jeb Bush to Tom Coburn to Lindsey Graham to - a shocker - Charles Grassley, who are willing to buck Grover Norquist and Rush Limbaugh in order to get back to work for the people is mildly encouraging.

GrumpyGus 11 months, 1 week ago

Danforth is precisely WRONG! We have a 2 party system in place for a reason. Group-think is what has us in the mess that we are in now. Specifically, the go-along to get-along Republicans acquiescing to Democrat spending. We don't have a taxation problem in this country, we have a spending problem. It has been borne out time and time again, if you raise indvidual and corporate tax rates, revenues to the government go down. Economic activity grinds to halt, so tax receipts dry up. The feds need to make true cuts (not decrease the amount of increase). Keep taxes the same, cut 2% a year for 8 years and lets see what that gets us. Shut your "moderate" trap Danforth, you are a has-been enabler of the problem.

tonto_goldberg 11 months, 1 week ago

Thank you for the recitation of all the current Tea Party bumper sticker slogans.

What we have is a majority party in Missouri that also controls the US House of Representatives, and its members can not work with one another, primarily because of the know-nothing tea party types. The Democrat party hasn't contributed much to gridlock lately although they might become the next problem if the GOP can get back to work for the people. There was a time when the adults ran the GOP, and we need them back.

Sequoia 11 months, 1 week ago

If you want to see the effects of austerity, look at Europe. You have the solution exactly backwards, Gus. Spending in a recession stimulates economic activity that increases tax revenue.

We need short term spending and long-term cuts and reorganization. DRAMATIC SHORT TERM SPENDING CUTS WILL MAKE EVERYONE IN THE USA MUCH, MUCH WORSE OFF.

Tax cuts do NOT go into stimulating economic activity. Business use reduced tax revenue to pay bonuses and buy back stock to increase its price. Tax cuts do NOT translate into more hiring.

Grumpy Gus, you do not know how business works. You're just know the party lines.

Groupthink kills. REJECT THE TEA PARTY.

spelchek 11 months, 1 week ago

"Grumpy Gus, you do not know how business works." -- Neither does the POTUS, 8.2% unemployment says so.

GrumpyGus 11 months, 1 week ago

Based on your "economic" argument, we should be living in Shangrila. Every year the feds spend more and more. The last year of Bush's term they spent more than the first. Yet the economy is somehow stagnant? And we all know about Obama's profligate spending. Please try to argue from a point of common sense if not economic sense. If your goal is to get more revenues to the feds (hopefully used to pay down debt), then you should not want to raise tax rates. And for the record, never been to Tea Party rally, but it sounds like their economic platform is pretty good. I wonder if you have been to a Tea Party rally?

tonto_goldberg 11 months, 1 week ago

A Tea Party Rally is pretty good theater but not a very good education. I believe the Tea Party gets pretty good press coverage. It's more than proportional to their size, especially if you listen to or read Fox News. So, I also believe we all have a pretty good idea of where they stand on issues. A lot of us just disagree with them.

Sequoia 11 months, 1 week ago

John, maybe not Shangrila, but we might be living in a stronger country today if we had not made the unprecedented, irresponsible decision to spend money on the Iraq War and the Bush tax cuts at the same time. Bush squandered our surplus, and that made us more vulnerable to the recession. It is the recession that has reduced revenues and made debt a higher portion of GDP, not Obama's discretionary, non-stimulus spending.

Obama spent to execute the stimulus that both parties agreed to. Outside that, he has been conservative with spending.

I agree the debt is too high. But, in a recession, paying down the debt is not nearly as important, in the short term, as stimulus spending to get people back to work. Remember, the private sector is adding jobs. The public sector is where the current job loss is coming from. Stimulus spending, if it is done right, gets people back to work. Lowering taxes does not.

Interesting, John, you chastize me for common sense. Then you say, if I want more revenues, cut taxes. How is that common sense? Only in the Tea Party's "trickle down economics on steroids" land.

The Tea Party is suckering you, dude. Unless you're a very, very rich person, you are voting against your own economic interest if you vote the Tea Party. They say things that you may agree with culturally and conceptually, but their ACTUAL PLANS are very much against your economic interest. Know that!

Grace, there is another option for Greece besides austerity. The other option for Greece is for their citizens to pay the taxes they owe. Greece's big problem isn't spending, so much as it is decades of tax evasion.

For the record, trees don't rally for anyone.

John 11 months, 1 week ago

Hey, Tonto: You need to knock it off. You can state your opinion and even argue the point without classifying or vilifying someone in each of your posts. MANY people, who are not active affiliates of ANY party, believe that compromise is exactly the wrong thing. If someone believes a particular action is correct, why should they change their opinion (vote, backing, etc) in order to pass something that they believe is WRONG. Geeeezzz, why is that so hard to understand?

tonto_goldberg 11 months, 1 week ago

I only offer my opinion. The only people I hear claiming that compromise is a bad thing are the Tea Party Types, and I am sure that you are aware of the survey and study results on them. They are not at all well informed even though they believe themseoves to be.

It really is time for the adults in the GOP to come back to life.

John 11 months, 1 week ago

I see. So, as I understand it, not only "Tea Party" members refuse to compromise but, now, so do the GOP memebers? That sounds suspiciously like, you are writing that ONLY the democrats are correct? So, the corollary is: Democrats will change their vote just to go along with the flow?

tonto_goldberg 11 months, 1 week ago

Simple math. The Tea Party has just enough numbers to prevent the GOP from acting. In this year's Missouri legislature, the GOP had three factions that would not work with each other. The Democrats do not have enough numbers in Missouri to matter.

GrumpyGus 11 months, 1 week ago

I am for obstructionism when we can see empirical evidence that our current course of action is harming the country (high debt, high unemployment, recession, inflation). Conversely I am opposed to obstructionism when, debt is shrinking, unemployment is dropping, and the economy is growing.

MO4LIFE 11 months, 1 week ago

Reagan is the tea party and GOP darling but he raised taxes more than any other president to tget the government back on track. But now I gues that means GOP & Tea Party like Reagan but wouldn't vote for him now!!!!!

Littleinvestor 11 months, 1 week ago

It would be so nice if we could have this discussion with civility. As I said, hatred means we can't. When Americans will not allow other Americans to have another viewpoint without calling them names, screaming at them and using other hateful methods to ram their points home, America is doomed. We ought to be able to discuss differences with facts and in a respectful manner. Obviously we can't as this exchange proves. There are 313 million Americans and about 313 million opinions on every subject. That requires civil discourse and yes, that awful word, compromise because not everyone can have 100 percent of what they want 100 percent of the time.

GrumpyGus 11 months, 1 week ago

The Danforth's of the world, with their highminded civility and compromise, have brought us to the existential brink as an economy and world power. His version of compromise was to give into every profligate spending scheme the Democrats came up with. This is about the crushing debt his ilk have brought upon my grandchildren. I disagree 100 percent and wouldn't give an inch on more spending or higher taxes. The time for half measues is over. He is wrong, period.

dokeus6 11 months, 1 week ago

Oh are you going to get hung out to dry on that Trickle Down Statement. Don't tell republicans that. They hate to hear that it hasn't worked. Never mind that Trickle down is the reason our economy has tanked twice in the last thirty years.

John 11 months, 1 week ago

It really is interesting that you believe "trickle down economics" do not work. It seems that CAPITALISM is what built the strongest country in the world, the great railroads of this nation, at one time the greatest maritime group in the world, etc etc etc. Now that we have stifled CAPTALISM and are suffering huge economic fluctuations, and all of our present ills, from liberal processes, you are telling us that the "former" did not work.

dokeus6 11 months, 1 week ago

Yea, that's about it. The great railroads were built along time ago John. Way before Reagan and his trickle down theories. The ocean ports have been open along time John. You offer no valid points how Trickle down works other than heaping all the money into tax shelters over seas. There is plenty of evidence on the internet to back my statements up just google it John.

How has Capitalism been stifled? Business are opening and closing.

Come on John where is your evidence. You want to debate something at least have something to debate with.

We can't get the rich people or corporations to create jobs because they have all of their money tied up over seas drawing interest. All of the jobs are overseas because of the corporations taking advantage of all the loopholes in the tax systems getting cheap labor overseas. WOW! You amaze me on how blind you can be.

spelchek 11 months, 1 week ago

Reagan got us out of a recession within 2 years and never looked back. All done with a democrat congress (Tip O'neil and Reagan were strong adversaries). George H.W., and Clinton both rode on Reagan's economic coat tails. Your version of history is misrepresenting and insulting to those with intellectual honesty.

dokeus6 11 months, 1 week ago

I think we have argued this point in other blogs spelchek. You have your opinion of what happened in the last thirty years and I have mine. So let it be at that. I didn't misrepresent anything from history other than stating obvious facts that are found on multiple sources on the internet. Sorry if you find the truth disconcerning.

dokeus6 11 months, 1 week ago

The downturn grace was caused by 80 billion dollars a month spend in Iraq.

dokeus6 11 months, 1 week ago

America's Energy Policy caused the Economic downturn. What are you talking about.? Oil, coal? what grace? You are not making any sense. You want to debate but you are not providing a solid point. Same old rhetoric as usual. I'm trying to be civil grace but it's like talking to a brick wall.

MO4LIFE 11 months, 1 week ago

Reagan also raised taxes more than any other president to get us of out of that recession in two years. So who is actually misrepresenting because i think that is GOP proof that raising taxes in a recession gets you out quicker.!!!

MO4LIFE 11 months, 1 week ago

So are you denying that Reagan raised taxes more than any other president or are you saying the fact that he did had nothing to do with it? If you bring in less revenue than you are spending you have to get more revenue and Reagan fully understood this. ASK JEB BUSH!!!!! or better yet ask George HW Bush and I quote "Quit calling them the Bush tax cuts let them expire"

John 11 months, 1 week ago

DOKUSE: Are you really that blind or are you being purposefully obtuse? Trickle down existed LONG before President Reagan, it just did not have that name. Yes, railroads, steel plants, automotive factories, shipping have all been around a long time. At one time we were leaders in all of that. Then, the more liberal folks moved in who would tax everything and go overboard in regulations brought it all to a stop. THAT is evidence, things that really happen, not some silly stuff in a very stupid book on theory by keynes. It is patently obvious to the eye, just as is "you cannot spend your way (with money you do not have) into a good economy because money spent by the government is NOT the government's money.

dokeus6 11 months, 1 week ago

Well John, do you think the regulations were put in place because of environmental concerns? Clean air, clean water. Are those not important for a society to function. Look at what is happening right now because of lack of regulation on the fracking chemicals. Ground water is being contaminated in areas where the process is being used. Maybe the regulations are overboard but on a few things the regulation is needed don't you think? Thanks for providing good solid examples. I appreciate it.

John 11 months, 1 week ago

And you take them and run with them, such as adding 2 plus 2 and arriving at 5 as the answer.

I was referring to taxation. I never said anything about environmental standards.

Y ou are grasping at straws to make a point. I am not sure with of you and your cohorts are better at building strawmen.

Sequoia 11 months, 1 week ago

Capitalism and "trickle down economics" are NOT the same thing, by a long shot. Capitalism is not stifled, man. We're living in times of record profits. "Liberal processes"? Did you get that out of an economics textbook or what?

Sequoia 11 months, 1 week ago

The big ones do. The ones who can afford to game system to their advantage do have record profits.

John wrote "liberal processes." That's his detailed knowledge of what's going on right now.

Sequoia 11 months, 1 week ago

No, I think gaming the system to make record profits is a bad thing. But that's what the Tea Party wants to do... make the system more game-able by creating more disparity between taxes paid on investment and taxes paid on work, and by removing campaign finance restrictions.

I support public elections. No private money. Then the politicians can compete for the people's vote, not the big private donation.

dokeus6 11 months, 1 week ago

Trickle down is not working. Hello, mcfly. It is not working. That is the definition of insanity. Keep doing things the same way over and over and expect different results.

dokeus6 11 months, 1 week ago

Faulty Logic is all you have Grace. Faulty Logic. No evidence to support anything except what a radio show host spits at you.

Sequoia 11 months, 1 week ago

Ask anyone in business? You don't think "anyone in business" would make a self-serving argument that lower taxes for them just also happens to be good for everybody?

Hey guys, if you give me more money now, I promise things will get better for you, too. Sometime later.

What a sucker.

MO4LIFE 11 months, 1 week ago

And still nobody wants to accept the fact that the GOP will not Raise taxes like Reagan did more than any other president to get us out of recession in 2 years. GOP Truth not the fairytale that they are living in now with this no new taxes bull.

Sequoia 11 months, 1 week ago

Oh yeah, Grace. That's your business model? Give it all to the top, and evenutally it will trickle down. Just wait. Give your money to us now, you'll get it back later. Promise.

You must never have worked in the competative marketplace. In "reality," anyone who doesn't get their money up front is a sucker. You get yours now. Who knows what will happen in the future? Only losers are satisfied with promises. People who know the game get their money up front, and they come up with phrases like "trickle down economics" to keep the suckers from rioting until its too late.

Why are you taking the side of people who are playing us for suckers? Just because they say a bunch of stuff about "liberals," and y'all eat it up. Suckers.

Just wait. You'll get yours. Just wait till I'm finished with mine. Hold on. Your leftovers are coming...

Sheesh. Y'all are getting played.