It's not as if these days weren't predicted; expected, even. After the mid-term elections in November gave the Republicans a majority in the House and an even better bargaining position in the Senate this January, it was obvious that President Obama would have to compromise on his positions to insure that Republicans didn't hold up Congress and shut down government until they got their way. What wasn't so obvious was that Republicans were willing to hold the middle-class hostage until their demands for tax cuts for the wealthy were met.
Three weeks ago House Republicans blocked a bill that would have extended unemployment insurance benefits expiring at the end of November and since then they have blocked the bill each time it's been brought up for a vote. Their reason? The Republican party made it clear that they would block all legislation in the lame-duck session until the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, set to expire at the end of the year, were extended.
Last week, Republicans in the Senate were successful in also blocking a Democratic plan to extend the Bush tax cuts to the middle-class. The middle-class tax cuts had been passed by the Democrats in the House just a few days before, prompting Republican Rep. John Boehner to call the vote to extend tax cuts to the middle-class and not to the wealthiest of Americans, 'chicken crap.'
Republicans have not only made good on their promise in blocking the extension of tax cuts for the middle-class: essentially raising taxes on 98 percent of Americans next month and blocking the extension of unemployment benefits: leaving up to two million out-of-work people without help by the end of the year, Republicans have also succeeded in holding up other legislation including the new START treaty, the Dream Act, and the Defense Authorization bill which in addition to outlining military funding includes the effective repeal of the discriminatory policy known as 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell.'
Obviously, the Dream Act and the repeal of DADT are not causes championed by most Republicans. Even though these measures would strengthen our military and finally plant the flag declaring this country's claim to the moral high ground, most Republicans are sure to stand in the way of these bills passing because, frankly, most Republicans don't really seem to like gays or brown people. But that Republicans would decide to hold up the new START treaty, an agreement with Russia to reduce and control nuclear arms, in order to scare Democrats into voting for upper-class tax cuts should tell you right away that if the G.O.P. is willing to undermine national security for the sake of fattening rich people's wallets, they'll do just about anything.
Republican obstructionist and bullying tactics have forced President Obama to choose his battles. With time running out on the middle-class and the unemployed, the President has decided to negotiate with Rep. John Boehner and Senator Mitch McConnell and propose a plan of extending unemployment benefits for thirteen months in exchange for twenty-four more months of Bush tax cuts, plus a two percent payroll tax reduction, plus an estate tax reduction, plus a tax exemption for inherited income up to $5 million dollars.
In all, as most Democrats and the liberal and progressive base have pointed out in various ways including an eight and a half hour filibuster-esque speech by Vermont's Independent Senator Bernie Sanders, this deal between President Obama and the G.O.P. is not exactly a fair or reasonable trade.
The left objects to the plan's over-generous concessions for the wealthy and are angry with the President for breaking his pledge to eliminate tax cuts for the rich, while the right objects to the expense of unemployment benefits, but both the Democrats and the Republicans agree that the plan means a huge, unaffordable increase in the national debt.
The tax deal, estimated to cost $858 billion dollars, is $71 billion more than the heavily criticized 2009 stimulus and at a time when many in Washington had expected to roll up their sleeves and get to work at reducing the deficit, President Obama and Republican leaders are now urging Congress to pass this package under the threat that not passing it will further damage the fragile economy.
President Obama has put himself in the position of negotiator-in-chief between the two political parties: a place he believed he could work to bring red state and blue state America together. But after two years of extending his hand to the Republican party, it seems President Obama has yet to notice that Republicans, at the very least, want nothing to do with him; at most, are eager to smack his hand away and spit in his eye. Republicans consider him an obstacle: avoid if possible, go over if necessary, remove eventually. If President Obama has a strategy in play; that he believes it's best to keep his enemies closer, he's not letting on. If he is willing to fight the Republicans or big business or Wall Street, he isn't showing it. And because of this, President Obama stands to lose the faith and support of his base.
But when facing a hostage crisis, what would his base expect the president to do?
Yes, Republicans are better than Democrats at standing their ground even if Republican's ground will be proven in time to be on the wrong side of history and yes, their base loves them for it. Some may see President Obama's unfavorable compromise with Republicans as capitulation to the enemy and a sign of weakness, but it is important to remember that showing empathy is not cowardice. Choosing to save those in distress rather than fighting the bad guy does not make the good guy weak. And yes, it is possible that, rather than always fighting, compromise with the opposition can lead to cooperation. It may not be sweet and it may not be easy, but being the good guy rarely is. All you can do is stay tough and live to fight another day.
Showing posts with label Elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Elections. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Damned if you do, damned if you don't
After successfully rescuing the economy from tumbling off a cliff into another Great Depression and overseeing ten straight months of private sector job growth equaling more jobs gained than in the entire eight years under George W. Bush, President Obama and Congressional Democrats still can't get any respect. The Right, Republicans and Tea Partiers, are all too happy to blame the President and his allies for their part in the Stimulus plans and 'bailouts' of the auto industry, banks, and Wall Street even if in the end they saved jobs, made profits, and boosted spending.
Even though government efforts like the Stimulus saved and created 1.4 to 3.6 million jobs last quarter, the Gross Domestic Product increased 1.7 percent, and the economy grew by an annual 2.5 percent according to the Congressional Budget Office; even though consumer spending grew 2.8 percent last quarter, the most in nearly four years, the Right will be quick to point out that 'spending money to make money' with the Stimulus and TARP raised our deficit. And even though the pace of job loss has slowed considerably over the last two years and unemployment rates have fallen in 23 states this last month, the Right will be just as quick to point out the national unemployment rate remains arguably high above 9 percent.
The state of the economy is improving under President Obama, but it's just not improving quickly enough for some and the efforts to improve it are constantly criticized by the Right. Despite positive growth in private sector jobs and the GDP, the Right continues to denounce the Bush and Obama TARP and the Stimulus Acts meant to revive the economy as spending bills that 'tax our children and grandchildren' apparently believing it would have been better for their children and grandchildren to be in a Great Depression. The Right contrarily rails against government loans to banks, auto makers, and Wall Street calling them 'bailouts' at the same time rails against government intervention in business in the form of regulation at the same time demands government accountability for job creation.
A rough economy and high unemployment always spells doom for the party in power. Two years of a Democratic President during tough times, even if things are steadily improving, means the Republicans will benefit from a beleaguered nation. Therein lies the rub. It's actually in the Republicans best interest to see the economy, and the nation, suffer.
The outsourcing of American jobs to other countries is damaging our economy yet Senate Republicans, along with a few Democrats including Connecticut's Lieberman and Virginia's Warner, voted to block a bill that would end tax incentives for companies to ship jobs overseas. Tax breaks, regarded by Republicans to be the best way to stimulate economic growth, was voted down by Republicans in the Senate when Democrats proposed a bill that would grant tax breaks and free up lending to small businesses. Consumer spending on household goods accounts for roughly two-thirds of our economy and unemployment benefits puts money in the hands of people who will spend it, yet House Republicans blocked the extension of unemployment benefits.
Instead of backing any Democratic effort to boost the economy, even if they have done so in the past, Republicans are focused on one plan: the extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. While President Obama and Democrats support extending middle class tax cuts to individuals making less than $200,000 ($250,000 for joint filers), Republicans want all the Bush tax cuts extended including those to the wealthiest 3 percent of Americans who without the tax cut would only see their taxes go up at most, 4.6 percent. Although the Right raises objections to increasing the deficit with Stimulus plans, government loans, and unemployment benefit extensions, they are fired up to add $700 billion more in debt to finance tax cuts for the rich that have proved disastrous to our economy in the decade since President Bush enacted them.
Favoring the Bush tax cuts over the extension of unemployment benefits makes no economic sense even to John McCain's former economic adviser, Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody's Analytics. According to Zandi's testimony before the Senate Finance Committee for every dollar spent on making the Bush tax cuts permanent there is an $.32 increase in the GDP whereas for every dollar spent to extend unemployment benefits there is an $1.61 increase in the GDP. In other words, according to Zandi, a dollar spent on unemployment compensation gets five times more "Bang for the Buck" to the GDP than a tax cut for the rich.
Republicans and Tea Party Republicans who ran in this year's elections on the slogan: 'it's the economy, stupid,' now find themselves having to state their positions on the economy in ways that often sound confusing, contradictory, and plain stupid.
In spite of positive growth in the economy, the strange backlash against the policies responsible for that growth, put in place by the President and the Congressional Democrats, favored the Right in the elections. If the dominant thought in the minds of voters was, 'where are the jobs?' then the thought in the minds of President Obama and Democrats must have been, 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' and Republicans are happy to have it both ways.
Even though government efforts like the Stimulus saved and created 1.4 to 3.6 million jobs last quarter, the Gross Domestic Product increased 1.7 percent, and the economy grew by an annual 2.5 percent according to the Congressional Budget Office; even though consumer spending grew 2.8 percent last quarter, the most in nearly four years, the Right will be quick to point out that 'spending money to make money' with the Stimulus and TARP raised our deficit. And even though the pace of job loss has slowed considerably over the last two years and unemployment rates have fallen in 23 states this last month, the Right will be just as quick to point out the national unemployment rate remains arguably high above 9 percent.
The state of the economy is improving under President Obama, but it's just not improving quickly enough for some and the efforts to improve it are constantly criticized by the Right. Despite positive growth in private sector jobs and the GDP, the Right continues to denounce the Bush and Obama TARP and the Stimulus Acts meant to revive the economy as spending bills that 'tax our children and grandchildren' apparently believing it would have been better for their children and grandchildren to be in a Great Depression. The Right contrarily rails against government loans to banks, auto makers, and Wall Street calling them 'bailouts' at the same time rails against government intervention in business in the form of regulation at the same time demands government accountability for job creation.
A rough economy and high unemployment always spells doom for the party in power. Two years of a Democratic President during tough times, even if things are steadily improving, means the Republicans will benefit from a beleaguered nation. Therein lies the rub. It's actually in the Republicans best interest to see the economy, and the nation, suffer.
The outsourcing of American jobs to other countries is damaging our economy yet Senate Republicans, along with a few Democrats including Connecticut's Lieberman and Virginia's Warner, voted to block a bill that would end tax incentives for companies to ship jobs overseas. Tax breaks, regarded by Republicans to be the best way to stimulate economic growth, was voted down by Republicans in the Senate when Democrats proposed a bill that would grant tax breaks and free up lending to small businesses. Consumer spending on household goods accounts for roughly two-thirds of our economy and unemployment benefits puts money in the hands of people who will spend it, yet House Republicans blocked the extension of unemployment benefits.
Instead of backing any Democratic effort to boost the economy, even if they have done so in the past, Republicans are focused on one plan: the extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. While President Obama and Democrats support extending middle class tax cuts to individuals making less than $200,000 ($250,000 for joint filers), Republicans want all the Bush tax cuts extended including those to the wealthiest 3 percent of Americans who without the tax cut would only see their taxes go up at most, 4.6 percent. Although the Right raises objections to increasing the deficit with Stimulus plans, government loans, and unemployment benefit extensions, they are fired up to add $700 billion more in debt to finance tax cuts for the rich that have proved disastrous to our economy in the decade since President Bush enacted them.
Favoring the Bush tax cuts over the extension of unemployment benefits makes no economic sense even to John McCain's former economic adviser, Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody's Analytics. According to Zandi's testimony before the Senate Finance Committee for every dollar spent on making the Bush tax cuts permanent there is an $.32 increase in the GDP whereas for every dollar spent to extend unemployment benefits there is an $1.61 increase in the GDP. In other words, according to Zandi, a dollar spent on unemployment compensation gets five times more "Bang for the Buck" to the GDP than a tax cut for the rich.
Republicans and Tea Party Republicans who ran in this year's elections on the slogan: 'it's the economy, stupid,' now find themselves having to state their positions on the economy in ways that often sound confusing, contradictory, and plain stupid.
In spite of positive growth in the economy, the strange backlash against the policies responsible for that growth, put in place by the President and the Congressional Democrats, favored the Right in the elections. If the dominant thought in the minds of voters was, 'where are the jobs?' then the thought in the minds of President Obama and Democrats must have been, 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' and Republicans are happy to have it both ways.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
If Only Obama Was Just A Little More Like Bush
Yes, it would seem that Obama squandered these two years, but a lot as gotten done and things have gotten somewhat better. While most people can express disappointment in the President: the Right that never would have accepted him - those that think the economy could be easily turned around, those that believe the lies in the media, and those that scoff at his accomplishments; while the Left who haven't gotten what they voted for - wanted Bush and Co. prosecuted for war crimes, wanted the wars to end immediately, wanted more from Health Care Reform, wanted tougher Wall Street Reform, wanted an end to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," wanted an end to Bush's tax cuts for the ridiculously wealthy, etc.
Unfortunately, the economy and the wars aren't easily solved problems and the Republicans never had any intention of working with Obama on legislation that could have made him popular. The President was so full of 'Hope' that he fooled himself into thinking he could work with Republicans in a bi-partisan way. Republicans spent two years playing politics, holding up bills in congress, 'compromising' by weakening the bills that did pass, and spent billions of dollars from corporate interests on attacks from Fox News/ conservative radio, and phony grassroots movements like the Tea Party to rile up the ignorant.
Most people pay little attention to politics (or news, in general) and most elections are about voting the bums in power out (mostly what 2008 was about as well). Republicans didn't win the House because they have better ideas - they just want to go back to Bush policies. Democrats lost because the disenchanted left stayed home and the voters who did turn out thought Democrats didn't do enough to fix the mess Bush left because Obama and the Democrats failed to properly communicate that the lack of progress over these last two years is due to the Republicans who think it is a bigger priority to play party politics for the sake of elections rather than focusing on solutions that this country in crisis urgently needs.
The election won't change much in Washington though. Republicans will only have slightly more power in January, so the next two years will likely be more of the same - gridlock stalling progress, while more vocal nonsense about repealing bills and impeachment. The difference now is, with Republicans controlling the House, if they disappointment their base (aka Tea Party) or if they don't make good on lowering debt or creating jobs, they'll be the bums thrown out in 2012.
If the country was actually excited to vote for the Republicans, they would have won more than just the House of Representatives in this year's election. So how can Republicans somehow think they have a mandate and have the gall to demand Obama lean further to the right than the disappointingly right-of-center he has been this whole time? While Republicans openly claim their major goal is for Obama to be a one-term president and call for 'no compromise' in extending Bush's tax cuts or undoing Social Security and reform after reform, Obama continues to play the nice guy at risk of losing his base by saying he is willing to work with the people who want to run him out of office, and in some cases, out of the country or up a tree branch.
The one good thing I can say about Dubya is that he at least maintained his base by standing firm for what he believed in (even though he was usually wrong). Obama's fault is that he is trying to make all the people happy all of the time.
Unfortunately, the economy and the wars aren't easily solved problems and the Republicans never had any intention of working with Obama on legislation that could have made him popular. The President was so full of 'Hope' that he fooled himself into thinking he could work with Republicans in a bi-partisan way. Republicans spent two years playing politics, holding up bills in congress, 'compromising' by weakening the bills that did pass, and spent billions of dollars from corporate interests on attacks from Fox News/ conservative radio, and phony grassroots movements like the Tea Party to rile up the ignorant.
Most people pay little attention to politics (or news, in general) and most elections are about voting the bums in power out (mostly what 2008 was about as well). Republicans didn't win the House because they have better ideas - they just want to go back to Bush policies. Democrats lost because the disenchanted left stayed home and the voters who did turn out thought Democrats didn't do enough to fix the mess Bush left because Obama and the Democrats failed to properly communicate that the lack of progress over these last two years is due to the Republicans who think it is a bigger priority to play party politics for the sake of elections rather than focusing on solutions that this country in crisis urgently needs.
The election won't change much in Washington though. Republicans will only have slightly more power in January, so the next two years will likely be more of the same - gridlock stalling progress, while more vocal nonsense about repealing bills and impeachment. The difference now is, with Republicans controlling the House, if they disappointment their base (aka Tea Party) or if they don't make good on lowering debt or creating jobs, they'll be the bums thrown out in 2012.
If the country was actually excited to vote for the Republicans, they would have won more than just the House of Representatives in this year's election. So how can Republicans somehow think they have a mandate and have the gall to demand Obama lean further to the right than the disappointingly right-of-center he has been this whole time? While Republicans openly claim their major goal is for Obama to be a one-term president and call for 'no compromise' in extending Bush's tax cuts or undoing Social Security and reform after reform, Obama continues to play the nice guy at risk of losing his base by saying he is willing to work with the people who want to run him out of office, and in some cases, out of the country or up a tree branch.
The one good thing I can say about Dubya is that he at least maintained his base by standing firm for what he believed in (even though he was usually wrong). Obama's fault is that he is trying to make all the people happy all of the time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)