为何达成财政悬崖协议如此艰难？

In today's Washington, the two parties have a hard time even agreeing to disagree.

如今在华盛顿，民主、共和两党想做到“求同存异都很困难。

That was the grim picture on New Year's Day in a capital still tied in knots over how to find a deficit-reduction deal, despite a full year's advance warning that one was absolutely, positively essential by year's end.

这就是华盛顿在元旦当天面对的残酷现实。尽管早在一年前就有警告称，绝对有必要在2012年年底前达成一项减赤协议，但新年第一天华盛顿在达成协议上仍面临重重障碍。

Even when the contours of a potential big deal were possible to see weeks ago, the path to compromise proved too hard for President Barack Obama and Republican House Speaker John Boehner.

即便是早在几周前一个潜在的大规模协议就已初具雏形，但对于美国总统奥巴马(Barack Obama)和众议院议长、民主党人博纳(John Boehner)来说，妥协之路仍然过于艰难。

When the two sides lowered their sights to seek a more modest deficit-reduction deal, there still was no solution in sight─until time ran out on the year 2012. Then Republicans and Democrats in the Senate decided to put aside the things they couldn't possibly agree on to pass a relatively narrow tax bill that included items each side could at least live with. But within hours, even that minimalist agreement was in peril in the House.

在双方降低了期望、试图达成一项更加折衷的减赤协议时，仍然没有可行的解决方案，这种状态一直持续到了2012年结束。随后，参议院的共和党人和民主党人决定搁置他们无法解决的分歧，从而达成一个相对小规模的税收法案，法案中将包括双方都至少可以勉强接受的条款。但几个小时后，就连这个最低限度的协议也在众议院变得岌岌可危。

All of which must leave many Americans asking a simple question: Why is this so hard?

这一切一定让许多美国人不解：为什么达成协议会这么难？

There are multiple reasons that even what seems easy is hard in Washington right now. The problems start, of course, with the basic polarization of not just Congress but the country. America is in an unusual political state, in which the two parties are quite evenly divided in power, but far apart ideologically.

一件看似简单的事如今在华盛顿却如此难以做到，这其中有很多原因。当然，所有问题的根源，是国会、甚至整个国家的两极化本质。美国目前正处在一个不同寻常的政治状态下，两党的权力基本上是均等的，但在意识形态上却迥然不同。

That makes governing difficult for Mr. Obama, but also for Mr. Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat. Because of the close division of power, neither side thinks it is required by the political calculus to give in to the other. Because of the wide ideological divide, neither side finds it easy to split the difference with the other.

这不仅增加了奥巴马治理美国的难度，也让博纳和参议院多数党领袖、民主党人雷德(Harry Reid)的工作很难做。因为势均力敌，两党都不认为自己需要向对方妥协。因为意识形态上的巨大分歧，达成折衷方案对双方来说也绝非易事。

Divisions are present in the Senate, to be sure, though the 89-8 vote in the wee hours of New Year's Day showed that it's at least possible to move around them in that chamber.

毫无疑问，参议院是存在分歧的，不过新年当天89比8的投票结果显示，在参议院，至少避开分歧采取行动的可能性是存在的。

In the House, there is almost no middle ground. Most members come from such reliably Democratic or Republican districts that they simply feel no pressure back home to compromise with the other side. Indeed, in this fall's election, 125 House members won their districts with 70% or more of the vote. Such margins leave House members thinking they have their own personal mandates to stick to their guns.

然而在众议院则几乎没有中间地带。大多数成员来自民主党或共和党占绝对优势的地区，他们在家乡根本没有向对方妥协的压力。事实上，在去年秋季的大选中，有125名众议员以70%甚至更高的得票率赢得了他们所在地区的支持。这样的优势使众议院议员认为，坚持自己的立场是天经地义的事。

That kind of polarization only creates the backdrop for other problems. Even when the differences between the two sides seem relatively small─whether, for example, to raise the top tax rate four percentage points for families earning more than $250,000, or whether to make that income level $450,000─compromise is difficult because both sides think important precedents would be set. Today's decisions will set the backdrop for broader debates on tax reform and spending later in the year.

这种两极化只会为其他问题的产生创造条件。就连在分歧显得相对较小的方面（比如是将25万美元以上还是45万美元以上年收入的最高税阶税率提高四个百分点），双方也很难妥协，因为他们都认为一妥协就会开启重要的先例。今天的决定将为今后更大范围的税改、支出辩论定下基调。

When Republicans agreed to raise any tax rates at all, for example, they knew that they had opened the door for a new set of arguments about which rates and at what level. The question had shifted from whether to raise rates to how─and that's a significant shift.

比如共和党人在同意提高税率的时候，他们知道这就为有关提高哪些税率、提高多少的一系列新争论敞开了大门。问题已经从要不要提高税率变成怎样提高税率，这一转变意义重大。

Similarly, when Mr. Obama said he could accept the idea of reducing entitlement costs by embracing a formula for lowering cost-of-living increases for Social Security recipients, he was setting a precedent as well─a precedent saying that Democrats were willing to consider policies that reduced entitlement spending not just by holding down costs but also by reducing benefits to recipients.

同样，当奥巴马表示他可以接受通过一套降低社保受惠者生活费增幅的公式减少福利支出的方案时，他也是在开启先例。他等于是在说，民主党人愿意考虑不仅通过控制成本、还通过减少领取人福利的办法减少福利支出的政策。

Similarly, both sides have a sense that the current talks are establishing something broader on another front: The debate is going to help set the tone for the entire second Obama term.

同样，双方都觉得目前的谈判在另外一个方面树立了某种东西：这次辩论将从一个方面奠定奥巴马整个第二任期的基调。

Democrats fear that if the president gives too much ground now, he will establish a pattern in which both parties will enter future debates expecting him to give in to Republican intransigence.

民主党人担心，如果奥巴马现在让步过多，他将树立一种模式，在将来的辩论中，两党都会指望他向共和党人的固执屈服。

By the same token, Republican partisans think the GOP needs to establish now that their party's control of the House, amid Democratic control of the Senate and the White House, is enough to give the party significant leverage for the next couple of years.

同理，共和党人也认为他们的政党现在需要表明，在民主党控制参议院和白宫之际，共和党对众议院的控制足以使它在未来几年拥有较大的筹码。

Lurking in the background is one other factor that makes compromise increasingly difficult in the capital. As both states and congressional districts become more clearly red or blue─dominated by Republican voters and Democratic voters, respectively─an increasing number of lawmakers worry less about a political challenge from the other party and more about a primary challenge from a ideologically driven conservative or liberal from within the lawmaker's own party.

在华盛顿实现妥协日益艰难的背后，还潜伏着另外一个因素。随着各州、国会选区变得更红或更蓝（分别以共和党选民和民主党选民为主），越来越多的议员不太担心对方政党的政治挑战，而更加担心本党之内某个意识形态上的保守派或自由派抢走自己的席位。

As a result, the more politically perilous route is to move to the middle in a compromise, thereby inviting that kind of primary challenge, rather than to stand on firm ideological ground and be accused of being too uncompromising.

因此，政治上更加危险的路径是在妥协之中走向中间地带从而招致党内的挑战，而不是坚守意识形态立场甘愿被指不善妥协。