|By Dave Helling, The Kansas City Star|
|McClatchy-Tribune Information Services|
Nixon vetoed a similar bill last year, you'll recall. The veto was upheld only after he launched a months-long, border-to-border campaign pointing out drafting errors in the measure.
Sustaining a tax-cut veto for two consecutive years, when the opposition holds huge majorities in the legislature, would be next to impossible in any state, particularly in an election year.
Nixon never had a chance.
A generation ago, a politician facing a similar defeat might have looked around for a deal. I'll give on taxes, he or she might have said, if you'll give me something in return -- expanding
There's little evidence that kind of conversation took place this year. Nixon did offer support of a tax cut that included full school funding and tax credit reform, but the trade didn't excite the public or the
Perhaps the governor bowed to reality: He didn't have enough votes to make a trade palatable for Republicans, so he may have concluded they wouldn't be interested.
It's also likely, though, that both parties have simply lost their taste, and therefore their talent, for deal-making.
No more. Blame
Some of this is understandable. No one should expect elected officials to trade away core principles or compromise at any cost.
But a deeply divided country will grind to a standstill if its lawmakers insist on a my-way-or-no-way approach. As anyone who has ever traded baseball cards will tell you, the game ends when one side insists it has to be
To get something of value, you have to give something of value.
We may never know whether
(c)2014 The Kansas City Star (Kansas City, Mo.)
Visit The Kansas City Star (Kansas City, Mo.) at www.kansascity.com
Distributed by MCT Information Services
We have detected you are using an adblocker. If you wish to enjoy our content please disable your adblocker and click the button below.