Political compromise becoming more difficult in Washington

WASHINGTON — A key senator walks away from bipartisan budget talks. Congressional Republicans vote to end Medicare in its current form. Democrats spend nearly two weeks pushing to end oil company tax breaks, knowing their effort will fail.

Is Congress broken? Is it being held hostage by political extremes and therefore unable to reach agreement on anything? Is the legislative branch of government undergoing a historic change?

The evidence is inconclusive. Despite the stalemates, in recent months lawmakers have cut deals on tax reductions, a historic nuclear arms treaty and a budget-cutting plan that prevented a government shutdown.

Yet changes in the political culture are clearly adding great pressure, triggered by two interdependent forces: an inescapable news media and increasingly polarized views. Together they challenge congressional leaders' ability to broker the compromise essential to successful democratic government.

"Can you imagine writing the Constitution in today's environment?" asked Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. " 'Don't give in, Ben. Don't compromise, Tom.' You'd be met right outside Independence Hall by cable TV, (conservative commentator) Bill O'Reilly and (liberal) Rachel Maddow, and they're doing play-by-play.

"In today's world it's very hard for bipartisan agreements to be formed because those who don't like what you're trying to do are able to generate a lot of pushback early on. So this 24-hour news cycle makes it very, very difficult — but not impossible."

Gridlock could have serious consequences soon. The government reached its $14.3 trillion debt limit Monday, and its borrowing authority is expected to last only until Aug. 2, unless Congress raises it. Lawmakers also have until Sept. 30 to agree to a federal budget for fiscal 2012, which begins the next day.

Congress is particularly vulnerable to the 24/7 media world, because it's Washington's most open political institution. The Capitol and its offices are about the only federal buildings where reporters can generally roam free, walk up to elected officials and talk to them.

As a result, it's become a popular haven for bloggers, Tweeters and growing legions of reporters under pressure to feed the Internet and the ever-voracious media world. That means there's "no longer pause and effect," said Charles Bierbauer, the dean of the University of South Carolina journalism school and a former CNN anchor.

Nuances are not welcome in this media world, as members of Congress are wary of uttering a sentence that can instantly go viral and embarrass them. Witness the uproar over Newt Gingrich's single critical comment on the House GOP Medicare plan; some analysts think the conservative blowback at Gingrich could end his nascent presidential campaign.

"It's (information) no longer mediated," Bierbauer said. "Now you've provoked the guy on the other side of the aisle and you've gotten into turf battles which more likely would have been resolved in the cloak room in the good old days, rather than on Facebook. That's a larger problem than media itself."

A related part of the problem is the growing clout of ideologically inflexible political groups, who often react to any out-of-line utterances by politicians with quick and vicious outrage.

As a result, "there's less space for politicians to compromise and not have repercussions from it," said Steven Greene, an associate professor of political science at North Carolina State University.

For all the pressures of the modern era however, partisan gridlock is hardly new, and history shows that Congress' best shot at compromise comes near a deadline. December's agreement to extend the Bush-era tax cuts came just weeks before they were about to expire. Last month's budget-cutting deal was announced about 90 minutes before the government was to run out of money.