Why Senator Collins' op-ed on divisiveness is the height of hypocrisy

[ProSense]

Steve Benen dismantles Collins' hypocritical op-ed on divisiveness.

Sen. Susan Collins (R) of Maine has a fairly long op-ed in the Washington Post today on civility, denouncing the "bomb-throwing, scorched-earth, incendiary political rhetoric" that's come to dominate much of the discourse. I don't doubt for a moment that Collins is entirely sincere, and would gladly play a constructive role in elevating the tone of our larger political conversation.

<...>

But that's really just the tip of a misguided iceberg.

The way out is far from clear, but I would suggest that a divided government and a more evenly split Senate are more conducive to bipartisanship than the super-majorities and one-party control of the White House and Congress that we see today. When one party has all the power, the temptation is to roll over the minority, leading to resentment and resistance because the minority has so few options.

Collins may not fully appreciate this, but Democrats don't have "all the power," because Senate Republicans, as a matter of course, block everything they can and Dems lack the ability to stop them. For that matter, whatever "temptation" Dems might have to "roll over the minority," it's worth emphasizing that the White House and Democratic leaders on the Hill have routinely pleaded with the GOP to strike bipartisan deals (on stimulus, health care, energy, Wall Street reform, immigration, etc.). In every instance, nearly every Republican has refused to compromise.

When I led the effort in 2009 to try to produce a more fiscally responsible stimulus bill, I was attacked by partisans on both sides. On the left, I was attacked by columnists for cutting $100 billion from the bill and mocked in the blogosphere as "Swine Flu Sue" for my contention that spending for a pandemic flu did not belong in the stimulus package but should be part of the regular appropriations process. On the right, I was denounced as a traitor and a RINO ("Republican in name only"), and one of my Republican colleagues targeted me for a campaign that generated tens of thousands of out-of-state e-mails denouncing me.

Actually, another Republican, Pennsylvania's Pat Toomey, went even further, suggesting Collins might be a communist. A year later, Collins nevertheless announced her support for Toomey, traveled to Pennsylvania to endorse him, and even helped him raise money.

And there's the point that Collins just doesn't seem to understand. Her opinion piece says she'd like to see "those who put partisanship over progress and conflict over compromise" lose elections, but there's no evidence she means it. If she did, she wouldn't support a right-wing bomb-thrower like Toomey, who named Collins the "Comrade of the Month" for her role in helping rescue the economy from a depression last year.

Indeed, there's a larger context that Collins seems to deliberately ignore. Her party keeps moving further and further to a hysterical right-wing cliff, but she says and does nothing about it. Collins actually does the opposite -- supporting extremists seeking Senate seats, and insisting that her party deserves to win "both" the House and Senate, despite its hard-core conservatism.

More to the point, she sees fringe candidates, Tea Party zealots, and unhinged media personalities undercutting the discourse and moving her party to the right, but instead of standing up to denounce the development, Collins applauds and enables the development.

For that matter, by helping her party's unprecedented obstructionism, Collins is actually making matters worse, even as she complains about the trajectory.

<...>

One of the issues that best highlights Republican obstrution is climate change legislation.

Benen: NO COMMONLY SHARED REALITY....

Ron Brownstein notes in a terrific new National Journal column just how striking it is to see a major American political party decide, all at once, to reject climate science in its entirety. (via Jay Rosen)

British Foreign Secretary William Hague, a prominent conservative leader in the U.K., was in the U.S. last week, and described climate change as perhaps the 21st century's biggest foreign-policy challenge," He added, "An effective response to climate change underpins our security and prosperity."

His strong words make it easier to recognize that Republicans in this country are coalescing around a uniquely dismissive position on climate change. The GOP is stampeding toward an absolutist rejection of climate science that appears unmatched among major political parties around the globe, even conservative ones. <...>

Just for the record, when the nonpartisan National Academy of Sciences last reviewed the data this spring, it concluded: "A strong, credible body of scientific evidence shows that climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for a broad range of human and natural systems." Not only William Hague but such other prominent European conservatives as French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel have embraced that widespread scientific conviction and supported vigorous action.

Indeed, it is difficult to identify another major political party in any democracy as thoroughly dismissive of climate science as is the GOP here. Eileen Claussen, president of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, says that although other parties may contain pockets of climate skepticism, there is "no party-wide view like this anywhere in the world that I am aware of."

And in case this isn't clear, unanimous Republican opposition to any meaningful efforts to combat global warming makes any kind of coordinated international effort impossible.

<...>

But the result is the same. The combination of deliberate Republican ignorance and the Republican scheme to break the United States Senate makes the crisis even more serious, with little hope on the horizon. It also speaks to a larger truth -- because there's no commonly shared reality among Democratic and Republican policymakers, the prospects for compromise are effectively non-existent.

Sen. Susan Collins (R) of Maine this morning noted, "I don't know who first described politics as the 'art of compromise,' but that maxim, to which I have always subscribed, seems woefully unfashionable today."

Yeah, I wonder why that is.

As Think Progress noted recently:

McCain Has Become A Climate Conspiracy Theorist

Graham Reportedly Terrified That Fox News Would Learn That He Was Negotiating A Climate Bill