(Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call/Newscom/Zuma Press/TNS)

Pope: What bipartisan unity could mean for U.S.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditmail

After Democratic representatives vocalize their goal to work with the other side of the aisle, possible compromises become more fathomable.

Rep. Cheri Bustos, D-Ill., Rep. Seth Moulton, D-Mass., and Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, all potential presidential candidates for 2020, gathered at the Polk County Steak Fry on Sept. 30. The Democratic representatives stressed the need to unify in order to take back Congress from Republicans in 2018. The important thing to be aware of is that Democrats haven’t held the majority of the House since 2011 and haven’t held the majority in both the House and the Senate since 1995. All of the representatives said they disagree with everything President Trump stands for; however, they didn’t rule out working with him in the future. This is good because although the majority of the country did not vote for Donald Trump, a large number of people did, and those people’s concerns and beliefs need to be addressed in order to prevent another Trump-like presidency.

If both sides of the aisle were willing to work together, what compromises would come of it? Ryan strives to focus on an economic
message that includes everyone in the country, concluding that the economy is something that affects every citizen. The economy is a problem the U.S. has been dealing with for more than a decade. Which makes Americans much more likely to be willing to settle into a compromise. The issue is where to begin. Taxes play a big role in the economy, and finding a tax plan that both parties can agree on is a difficult task. With that, lawmakers also have to ensure that the compromise will be effective.

RELATED: Guest opinion: GOP’s ‘better care’ would hurt Iowans

A more likely compromise to look out for in the future is an agreement that bypasses the deportation of DREAMers, undocumented immigrants who arrived in the U.S. as children. In this agreement, it’s likely that more work would be ordered on the Mexican-American border. This compromise was rumored after Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., sat down with Trump to discuss the ending of DACA, and the DREAMers affected, in early September of this year. Although House Speaker Paul Ryan and Trump made sure to stress to the news media that no deal was made.

RELATED: Ernst faces tough questions on Graham-Cassidy bill at town hall

On the state level, earlier this week a judge upheld the current three-day waiting period for abortions after Planned Parenthood of the Heartland and the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa sued in May in efforts to stop the bill. The waiting period means that a woman has to wait 72 hours before she can get an abortion. Planned Parenthood is planning to appeal this decision by the Iowa Supreme Court. The likelihood of a compromise arising from this is slim, but if the Iowa House and Senate turn blue in the next election, a compromise may not be so out of reach because this issue is heavily pressed on.

All in all, the left is pleading for compromises as a new party led by Trump plows through legislation with a wicked thumb. Some of the old Republicans fear this new party as well, increasing the chances of actual change emerging from the recent political turbulence. Will this disruption lead to two unlikely parties working together or will it push them further apart?

-Mars Thera Pope

Special Sections

Print Edition

Front Page PDF

Text Links