Rare Example of Bipartisanship

[Wiseacre]

I wish we had more members of Congress like these guys:

snippet:

The House intelligence committee used to be one of the meanest snake pits in Congress, a place where members were so busy sniping at each other they failed to provide effective oversight of the intelligence community. It was a model of what was wrong with Washington.

Amazingly enough, the committee has found its way out of the wilderness under a new chairman and ranking member, Reps. Mike Rogers and C.A. "Dutch" Ruppersberger. With their leadership, the House has approved intelligence authorization bills by lopsided bipartisan margins the past two fiscal years, after many years when the committee was too divided to pass such legislation.

"Rogers and Ruppersberger have made bipartisanship work," says Gen. Mike Hayden, a former CIA director who struggled with the old, dysfunctional system. Back then, he recalls, "the committee was just wild -- incredibly contentious and highly politicized. They have worked hard to get it back to business."

RealClearPolitics - A Rare Example of Bipartisanship

 

[BreezeWood]

Rogers' first move was to go to Ruppersberger, his Democratic counterpart, and propose a truce. "We can continue this bickering and be dysfunctional -- and do a huge disservice to the American people -- or we can work it out together," Rogers remembers telling his colleague.

Ruppersberger, a former prosecutor from Maryland, was an ideal partner for the ex-FBI agent. "We made a commitment to each other that we would work together and wouldn't sandbag each other," says the Democrat. The two leaders also made some changes in the committee personnel and instructed them to brief members jointly. Explains Ruppersberger: "Before, the other side of the aisle was the enemy."

... and instructed them to brief members jointly.


This alone would / should alleviate much of the animosity between the two parties.

I'm not sure bipartisanship is a necessity for passing legislation any more than strong differing opinions that lead to similar conclusions when the voting will in fact be the same either way - what is best is a well informed public that is able to discern properly the differences to know properly for themselves how the resolution was resolved and if it was in their best interest.