Slowpoke Democracy

Democracy survives when citizens can patiently bargain with one another. In today's world, is there still time to do that?

“Finally, finally, finally.” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer wearily cheered the congressional compromise to pass a $95B package this week, for  defense support for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan. President Biden murmured likewise when he signed the bill into law: “It should have been easier. It should have gotten there sooner. But we got it done.”

Why did getting it done take so long? The superficial answer is about polarization and then rescue in our Congress. Wheels were spinning month after month between antagonistic Democrats and Republicans. Then, slowly, a reconciling superhero emerged. Step by step, House Speaker Mike Johnson grew into his leadership role—developing the courage and ingenuity, so he could gradually bring a reasonable majority from the warring tribes together. Through his patience, engagement, and deal-making savvy—and help from Democrats— he forged a deal in the contentious House that set-in motion the final agreement in the Senate, and then presidential approval.

artwork: Courtney Havenwood/ MidJourney & public domain

All that is somewhat true, but that take underplays the considerable work of many other players. Public servants who spent late nights debating and crafting elements of the deal, and working across the aisles to foster agreement (Schumer, Mitch McConnell. Hakeem Jeffries, Biden--and countless other legislators and behind-the-scenes staffers, of both parties. And also, of course, Donald Trump, as “the dog who didn’t bark” in the end).

Broader Lessons

But let’s put aside the superhero stories and personality dramas. The events of this past week demonstrate something more fundamental that Americans often neglect. When Congress achieves some major policy decision, it’s only through good bipartisan bargaining.

Bargaining is fundamental to our (and all) democracy. Nothing important gets done without people of differing world views and interests negotiating in good faith to find common ground. And finding such common ground always takes lots of time. Meetings and more meetings. Listening and problem-solving with others you don’t see eye to eye with. Or maybe don’t even like personally.  Testing, revising and retesting ideas. Building trust—slowly and patiently. Tick, tick, tick goes the clock.

Which is basically what happened over the last several weeks. The story of the new foreign assistance bill is a living diorama of democracy’s core assumptions at work. The people’s representatives slowly arrived at multiple bipartisan compromises, that piece by piece won over different constituencie. For example, the bill was initially modularized to allow legislators to vote their consciences for separate appropriations. Aid to Ukraine was not a pure grant, but rather included some “forgivable loans.” Military funding for Israel was counterpointed by money for humanitarian assistance in Gaza. Such strategies are exactly how bargains are put together, so that democracy can operate without some “boss” taking charge of everyone else—and then simply dictating policy. Johnson and other congressional leaders began to work together, bringing other people along. Slowly and patiently. And sometimes painfully too.

Bargaining in History

Arduous, negotiated bargaining first created American democracy. Our Constitution was not written by consensus-happy philosophers. It was hammered together in the hot summer of 1787, under force of deadline, by mortal men—yes, with many ideals, but also with their own strong opinions and represented interests. The final text grew out of long arguments and difficult negotiations. Most famously, our founders forged compromises about the relative powers and rights of states versus those of the national government. About the selection and relative powers of the presidency. About the permissibility and status of slavery in the new governing system. About whether the new system needed a separate Bill of Rights. Many of the delegates were unhappy or even pessimistic about the final product. The sometimes-imperfect agreements found in our 18^th C. Constitution still guide us—but also haunt us— today.

Extended processes of bargaining are not unique to our American system. Major western democracies were all born of the same, which often settled bouts of civil violence and revolution. The classical Athenian polis grew out of negotiations among warring aristocrats and commoners, about the rights and responsibilities of citizenship in their polis. The ancient Roman Republic formed through hard-fought governing agreements between patricians and striking soldier plebeians, later institutionalized in the laws of Res Publica. The “constitutional monarchy” of Great Britain was established through iterative settlements between kings and their eventually elected members of Parliament. Monarchs progressively ceded to the latter more rights and responsibilities for policy, spending, and justice, eventually became only symbolic national leaders.

Strategic Questions of Speed

But if bargaining and compromise have been endemic to all democracies, such human processes are never fast or easy. Negotiations tend to move slowly, as each side wrestles to understand opposing views. Bargainers build coalitions, revise opinions, and craft terms that can somehow gain agreement of more people needed for a deal. Of course, using intimidation can accelerate the process—but that’s not democracy. That’s how autocrats, kings and tyrants “get to yes.” Democracy, by contrast and by nature, gets to yes by citizens working incrementally, finding win-win bargains, with other citizens who hold different agendas and opinions.  

A major challenge for American democracy today is whether our bargain-inherent system can now move quickly enough to survive. Will our current system of collective decision making be efficient enough to meet the demands of an accelerating global economy? And a broadening array of enemies? And domestically, an increasingly impatient electorate?

Despite promoters’ enthusiasm for the new aid bill passed this week, American voters remain divided about it. Many observers worry whether the support for Ukraine will be enough to renew its flagging war effort. Will the humanitarian aid for Gaza be enough to offset America’s declining reputation as an ally of Israel? Will more money for Taiwan be able to counter rising Chinese militarism and Asian regional encroachment? Of course, we hope “yes” all across—but it’s too early to tell. For my money (and some of my taxes are in there, I guess) it was the right bet to make.

Looking Ahead

We must be clear-eyed about today’s security situation. America faces a growing alliance of nuclear and near-nuclear powers pitted against our nation. Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and other proxies are now collaborating to undermine the peaceful post-war order we have created and maintained with other democratic allies. Our foes periodically attack our overseas assets and infrastructure, threaten our regional friends, and use sophisticated cyber weapons and propaganda to manipulate America’s public opinion. They harry our civic solidarity.

None of these enemies is a democracy. None is burdened by the trade-off between freedom and rapid action that democracy entails.  Led by authoritarians, adversarial nations use violence, fear and surveillance at home to maintain order and compliance with their strategies against us. Democracy’s sluggish decision-making is not something they worry about. But it’s time we start worrying more about that for ourselves.

Let’s continue this conversation in coming weeks. I hope to see you here again soon.