Republicans may be horrible, but they aren’t running Baltimore.
If a person happens to point out that Baltimore’s criminally inept government has been run exclusively by Democrats since 1967 (with one Republican mayor since 1947), and features not a single council member who isn’t a liberal, they may be called a “lazy apparatchik.” Because not everything, you see, is reducible to mere party politics.
Now, if an economic renaissance sparked by the progressive policies of Stephanie Rawlings-Blake had lifted Baltimore from poverty, I imagine Democrats would be eager to claim credit for the accomplishment. Entire political debates are predicated on the effectiveness of partisan ideas. We blame presidents for recessions they probably have little to do with, yet, according to liberal pundits, the party overseeing a city riddled with poverty, failing schools, high crime rates, and racial tension bears no responsibility for what’s happening.
The president disagrees. Sort of. After a night of violence and looting in Baltimore, Barack Obama spoke to the press and said that “we,” as a country, “have to do some soul searching” – by which he meant “they,” as in conservatives, need to get on board.
Obama said that solutions to mend Baltimore’s suffering were sitting right there in Washington; unpassed due to ideologically inflexible Republicans. “And there’s a bunch of my agenda that would make a difference right now …” Obama claimed, before going on: “Now I’m under no illusion that under this Congress we’re going to get mass investments in urban communities, and so we’ll try to find areas where we can make a difference, around school reform and job training and some investments in infrastructure in these communities trying to attract new businesses in.”
What piece of legislation have Republicans obstructed that would have helped keep families together in Baltimore – right now?