What Does Government Mean to You?
This is reposted from a comment I made... I am putting it out in the blog for discussion. Not that I am right, but as an opinion to be weighed:
This bill is a stimulus bill. The goal is to stimulate the economy as soon as possible and stabilize it over the next several years. The bill represents a pendulum swing away from the failing private sector into public sector works.
That being said, it is easy to get mad when items get removed from an omnibus bill. You remove a piece of the pie, and that piece's special interest will cry out loud. Those of us that believe in and fight for education in this country are aghast over the GOP intent to "compromise" by knifing away education. Can the progressives effectively argue for its stimulus power, however? Further, can these very agenda items be passed on to another piece of legislation, say one that is geard towards education overhaul and reform?
We are in a different era, and there are choices. We can define this era. This era can be one where we continue to attack the government where on one side are effective lethal Republicans and the other side are wimpy Democrats. We can analyze every slashed budget item as a call to arms, and view every scandal as the next Watergate.
In effect, we will be behaving exactly as our masters desire. Reagan said the government does not work... and here we are as progressives reinforcing that meme every single day. The Republicans want an aura of power... and here we are as progressives granting them that illusion every single day. When a budget item (that can be added on another bill) gets slashed from this stimulus package, we say it is because the GOP is so powerful and all over the airwaves and the Dems are caving. We are confusing the process of checks and balances with GOP might. Thus we are lending to the image of Republican power. Then there is the reinforcement that every scandal is dooming Obama... and that only makes the first two points stronger.
We are engaging in a circular firing squad. Our republic has always behaved in a spirit of compromise, brokerage, and negotiations. Many of these negotiations are unpleasant because there are a host of interests vying for the spotlight. I can tell you this: if the slave state compromises did not destroy this country, then the current stimulus compromises will not destroy it either.
If you as a progressive view progress as "my ideas, my spending, my needs, right now," then you are in the wrong place at the wrong time in history. There is an opposition based on ideas that are finally losing their lustre. But it does not happen immediately, and certainly not when there is a crisis to be managed. As far as I am concerned, the GOP can demand cuts on a host of items that can not be argued as pure stimulus. If the economy gets stimulated and funds begin coming back to the treasury, then we can afford to tackle education and health care. Then the GOP will look like fools for stepping in the way in a time of crisis.
You can see it happening now. A gang of four is busy building the consensus necessary for a brave surrender from the GOP. Instead of seeing this and celebrating it, we are attacking the natural state of governance...
What did you all expect? A mirror image of Bush? A bizzaro world where Obama can push whatever progressive legislation he desires and we can through fiat become a utopia? Seriously?
Bush was a tyrant who was slowly drained by the actions of a heroic few. But while he governed, he was most certainly a tyrant and the Congress were a bunch of rubes. History may one day reveal what actually happened to allow our Republic to temporarily become a tyranny. But now... now we have the first strains of a real working representative government. And to me it is beautiful. (End Rant)
Zipper, I have no problem with some projects being left to other bills, not with compromise. A few comments however, not necessarily aimed at you.
1. The idea that this is purely a short-term stimulus bill, and that anything not producing that must be cut, is not only wrong, but wrong-headed - politically & economically. Obama's team has shown that even with this stimulus, we could see unemployment rise from 6% to 9%. Also, it's clear that the economy will get worse over 2009, and may get even worse in 2010 - though they hope it will have bottomed. Finally, they're clear that the stimulus being provided is not large enough.
Here's the trillion $ question. What will the political context be later in 2009/10, since Obama expects the real world economy will be WORSE, even with the stimulus? Will there be support for yet another stimulus bill? Maybe. But I suspect it'll be lower. so this isn't just a one-bill battle that we should frame up as being about "compromise" and such, it is about the likely economic & political & cultural state of play in 2010 & 2011. And that may mean, start some things in motion now, even though they are not immediately stimulative, but will kick in 2011 etc.
2. Whether you view the ongoing trade deficit or our competitive & employment situations, we have to change our energy & health care systems (and possibly education & IT as well.) these have longer lead times, and we have to start now, given their lead-times. We've got 25%-30% of GDP locked into those two sectors, and we have to find 5-10% to help pay down debt, reduce trade deficits, etc. To wait til 2010-11 to start movement on these fronts strikes me as a dead loss.
3. Most people hear education and think... "future." But if that money goes to keep teachers hired, then it's just as much a short-term stimulus as extending funds to the unemployed. If its for buildings & equipment, then it's infrastructure spending, and very likely to move faster than many energy and transit investments. Again, looking ahead, if unemployment has soared, large numbers of companies are out of business, and we quite possibly are dealing with social disturbance on a large scale, do we think there will be much support - two years form now - for education spending? Start now, retain & add teachers, expand buildings, fund young people - and you could have 00's of thousands of young people off the 2011-13 unemployment rolls, and in school.
February 5, 2009 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can understand the drum beat of, "if not now, when?" But it looks like what is transpiring is a bill that has stimulus free of political context. If an action item is perceived as part of a liberal agenda, then it is contested. And the GOP wants their tax cuts because that shores ip their political clout.
What I see happening is that the private sector economy will continue to decline no matter what. A stimulus bill can only staunch the bleeding. But what I also see happening is an increased role for the public sector that will be shown as a counter to GOP talking points. The argument must be made that the public sector is putting shovels in hands and helping citizens weather the storm.
This won't be easy. What I am arguing against is the kind of intransigence displayed by certain individuals in the blogosphere. Their attitude it is fight and attack and punish the GOP. That Obama has to strap on a pair of six shooters and show the ruffians who's the sheriff. This reveals to me a tacit endorsement of unilateral executive privilege when it is exercised by our side. There isn't the corresponding realization that we are governed in a radically different way than they are supposing. And I hold that this is a criticism of government that reinforces neoconservative ideas about government not working.
February 5, 2009 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry for the delayed response, Zip. Working, and a good 5 mile skate. It's not Solana Beach, but for me - bliss, baby, bliss! ;-)
Some bloggers are just pent up, wanting punches thrown & bills shoved through I think. A lot of the time, I share that feeling. But I actually think Obama is looking 6-12 months out - when things are REALLY going to get ugly. At that point, he's going to need not just his original voters & his Congressional Dems. He's going to need a wider constituency. When you know you could well see people in the streets within the year, you don't cram down party line votes too early. Obama's an Ali, not a Foreman.
And he's hanging the GOP out to dry. I quite like it, actually. They're mouthing off... and are gonna have to eat it. I think he's aiming to peel off the gettable Republicans, both in the Senate (where he needs them) AND in the public. If he can do that, and leave the rest looking narrow, backward-looking, myopic about tax-cuts... then he wins a wider coalition.
His op-ed today was a plus. Not just pushing the urgency of short-term stimulus, but also repeating what you said, that we need more public sector. Steve Katz's blog links it, "This plan is more than a prescription for short-term spending - it's a strategy for America's long-term growth & opportunity in renewable energy, health care & education.... We have tried it (other) ways for too long. And because we have, our health-care costs still rise faster than inflation. Our dependence on foreign oil still threatens our economy & our security.... Now is the time to protect health insurance for the more than 8 million Americans at risk.... Now is the time to save billions by making 2 million homes more energy-efficient, and to double our capacity to generate alternative sources of energy within 3 years."
Split the GOP. While smiling & looking above it. Might work as well, maybe even better, than throwing haymakers.
February 5, 2009 10:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Beautiful to me as well, Zip. In fact I blogged this morning on the opportunity this presents for real engagement at the grassroots level. Obama says this is our time. Maybe it's time to make it so.
February 6, 2009 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
And, just to ask you a question, Quinn:
Given that representative government yields compromise even in crisis, does that make representative government a deficient government model for the times we live in? Historically speaking, great Presidents still had to negotiate over legislation with the opposition as well as their own party... and compromise.
So would it be better for progressives if Obama or someone like Kucinich were a unitary executive?
February 5, 2009 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
A unitary executive? Well, parliamentary systems have enormous power to make large-scale change, if they have a majority. Look at the UK or Canada today. Be hard to argue they're doing better.
What bothers is that I feel we DO have a unitary executive in one sense - that those who believe the shit of the last 20 years have actual working majorities in both parties, the media, business, etc. The Dems look & sound better, but the Daschle thing showed the deeper unity quite well, I thought. As have some of the new appointments. When an entire society moves strongly in a certain direction, and contrary voices are marginalized, you can have "unity," albeit in a slightly different sense.
But it's fracturing, I think - that intellectual and emotional buy-in they once had. And the main reason I preferred Obama over the other primary contenders was that I felt he had the potential, the ability, to learn. To change. Beneath his rhetoric (which has a value, not to discount it entirely), his original policy positions were pretty much mainstream Democratic. Which - to my mind - means incapable of dealing with what we've been handed.
But he has a chance to help us out, because he has the potential to BECOME something more. To think and see and act differently. And that, I would suggest, is our only real hope for political help. That someone (and someones), become something other than they were entering into this.
Sorry for the indirect answer, but that's where my head is.
February 5, 2009 11:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Back in "the day," we had "Teach Ins," quinn. Boy, do I wish we could schedule a morning for that. So many of us simply lack the wherewithal to really understand the economic problems we're in. You've got that info.... I'm wondering if we, as a group here at the cafe, could set something like that up. I don't really know what it might look like. But I'm sitting here, having never taken an economics course (maybe that's bad, and maybe that makes me someone who at least does not need to unlearn bad stuff!), and I'm "at sea" with this economy. Larry H would have me "look at the tiger." But I find myself only able to "pull the tail" and hardly understand the rest of it.
Well... maybe I'm dreaming, buddy... but I sure wish you could do a Teach In for us. Or you and others. :)
February 5, 2009 7:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks Thera, but I think we're running a giant Teach-In here as is. Just, it doesn't quite look like the 60's versions. There's an enormous amount of knowledge & insight here. I feel fine on some aspects of it all (like energy, environment, etc.) But on finance, interest rates, the dollar? There's dozens here waaaaay ahead. Same with health care. Housing. Exports. China. I just tag some of my faves, and follow 'em around.
So sometimes I feel like I'm adding something fairly solid, that I've thought about a lot, and other times... I'm just happy to learn.
How the pieces all come together, I don't know. It's kindof interesting though, eh? But thanks for the vote of confidence! ;-)
February 5, 2009 11:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the response, quinn. We all the illusion that "somebody" knows.... And we do our best to follow certain people, yes.
Glad you're here - when you can make it. :)
February 5, 2009 11:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Irony: Boomers have teach ins but never take economic courses.
Boomers always having a need to teach others.
Psst: don't trust anyone over 30.
February 6, 2009 4:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Education actually strikes me as obvious - there's provisions for worker retraining, funding so states don't have to cut education as they attempt to balance their budgets...there's specifics for education in renewables/energy efficiency and health care - which addresses a serious shortage. I think it goes to the idea that the job creation has to go beyond construction/infrastructure jobs.
That said, I do agree there's a decent amount of stuff in there that needn't be this time around.
February 6, 2009 9:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think you have a valid point and I think that compromise is a necessary part of the political process. However, I find myself pretty angry this week and it's not because republicans are asking for cuts to the bill. It's also not because they are questioning what is stimulative and what is not.
It's because their public face is ridiculous. Lindsey Graham today on the floor of the senate said "Scaring people is not leadership." With a straight face. Some other yahoo suggested that the republicans are the insurgency. Thune is showing us pictures of dollar bills stacked into space. WTF? This is not honest governing. This is not compromise. How did these people get elected? They are functionally retarded.
February 5, 2009 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why, O, I find your comment amazingly controlled. What happened to put you in such a docile mood today?
I watched and listened as Lindsey Graham performed...I thought he was practicing a comedy sketch for SNL...hahahahahahahaha! You mean he was seriously addressing the Senate???? Oh, dear...surely you're mistaken.
February 5, 2009 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just called republicans retarded, stilli. I don't think that's particularly measured. True. But not measured.
February 5, 2009 7:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL! Retarded IS measured, O...&^%#$#@$%^%&* retarded *&^$%#%^*(^@...would have been unmeasured.
I expected a better performance from you, and I want my money back! heeheehee! ROTFLMBO! Sorry, I'm laughing at myself, not you! Not very attractive, is it?
February 5, 2009 8:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
BTW, left you a message on your Obama post at dag.
February 5, 2009 8:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm giving up profanity for lent. So, I'm practicing.
February 5, 2009 8:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, in that case, you can keep the money...
February 5, 2009 8:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Psst, I'm not really giving up profanity for lent. I may as well cut off my arm.
February 5, 2009 9:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, dear... when is Lent?
February 5, 2009 9:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
DUH!
February 6, 2009 12:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Seems to me that the repubs have decided to act like people who can stand aside as a train wreck is going to happen... and just watch it - because, in their view, the efforts of some to try and help are not going to be perfect. it's a train wreck for god's sake! It's happening in slo-mo before our eyes! And the repubs want to sit and just watch?
It's really immoral. I have no other word for it!
February 5, 2009 7:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's a game of chicken, trying to get the other party to "blink" first. Part of hardball. Definitely an acquired taste at best...
February 6, 2009 12:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
The GOP are paid to be retarded. Lindsey Graham is an exceptional douche bag. The good news is that his popularity will decline in proportion to how many of his constituents have to pawn their guns in order to pay their bills.
February 5, 2009 9:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
The GOP should've gone to see Tropic Thunder.
Downey - "Never go full retard."
February 5, 2009 11:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Holy #$$%$^%! I missed that one. Wow. Really. Mind-boggling.
February 6, 2009 9:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
"In effect, we will be behaving exactly as our masters desire. Reagan said the government does not work... and here we are as progressives reinforcing that meme every single day. The Republicans want an aura of power... and here we..."
I have watched the hopeless, the defenseless, the imprisoned, the hungry, the homeless, as if they cannot wait to give more power to their oppressors for decades. Really, people who have been in stir off and on for years. People who are happy to put together five hundred bucks in a score.
I, for one am happy with the last two weeks and look forward to the weeks that are to come. There is a change in the wind, the thunder is coming from another place though I do not see it but can only hear it. A new confidence in Senator Reid and Gramma Pelosi is positively beaming.
I have not lost hope and I do not see great victories for the pigs who have controlled everything for so long.
But that is just this peasant's take.
Oh, and good post Zip. But you always have good posts. I can tell, because you draw good long comments from Q.
February 5, 2009 7:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, a peasants' get-together! I'm with you, dd! I'm pretty sure my dad's forebears were German farmers. I have a suspicion my mom's were British tradesmen. A peasant am I as well. But sorely tried in these dark days. Solidarity. That's what we need to hang on to. :)
February 5, 2009 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Won't it be ironic when the mob of peasants shows up at the door with the guns the NRA insisted they be allowed to own?
February 5, 2009 8:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think sometimes why not, they end up with bombs at the women's clinics claiming their rights to disrupt medical opinions and doings.
February 5, 2009 8:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Gentlewoman's Guild has heard nothing of these clinics... And bombs.... Pray tell.
February 5, 2009 9:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've got to hand it to you. Your ideology is about as pure as it comes.
Too bad history has proven it to be a falsehood time and time and time again without exception.
February 5, 2009 9:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Read Zip's Bio at the top right of the page.
Marine.
Life's more complicated than horseshit comments like the one you just made. And like I said, show just a touch of respect for people, willya?
February 5, 2009 11:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
You think that was bad? Read lis' blog then his comment...heartless.
February 6, 2009 12:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Dood:
Avoid the obtuse generalities and be specific. What is my ideology? How am I pure in said ideology? What about history is proving my ideology wrong?
I could open up a fortune cookie and get a better criticism. I could cut and paste this comment in any forum on the internet and everyone would perceive it differently.
So, if you are a real human being and not a bot, I would welcome a dialogue. Otherwise, get lost or develop a better algorithm.
February 6, 2009 1:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your pure ideology?,
In a nutshell, I'd have to describe it as a naive, childish, almost comic book form of wanabee Marxism.
Much akin to some kid being sure he prefers Fords, before even having an understanding of what an automobile is.
February 6, 2009 2:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
You got that from a post about representative government and compromise? Seriously? Checks and balances = Marxism? Are you high?
February 6, 2009 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Groucho Marxism more likely. :)
February 6, 2009 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama Hits Back at Republican Critics
As his economic stimulus package nears a vote in the U.S. Senate, President Obama continues to strike a defiant tone towards Republican critics of the large size of the bill.
A sampling of his comments before House Democrats tonight:
"Understand, the scale and the scope of this plan is right."
"First of all, I found this deficit when I showed up (long standing ovation from members)... I found this national debt doubled, wrapped in a big bow waiting for me when I stepped into the Oval Office."
"Come on, we are not going to get relief by turning back to the very same policies that for the last eight years doubled the national debt and threw our economy into a tailspin. We can't embrace a losing formula that says only tax cuts will work for every challenge we face."
"I don't care whether you're driving a hybrid or an SUV, if you're heading toward a cliff, you've got to change direction."
Just a little optimism from Goddard. I would be more nuanced, but I was never nuanced.
February 5, 2009 9:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
My favorite lines:
"Let's put Americans to work doing the work that America needs done."
and
"They're so strong and decent, the American people. And we have the capacity to do great things on their behalf. But we're gonna have to do with without thinking about ourselves."
Yoohoo, Mitch? Lindsey? Are you listening?
February 6, 2009 7:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
It means that we can have a little less crowding in our prisons with politicians locked up in Washignton.
It meens the IRS has something to do.
February 6, 2009 4:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Government is the people.
February 6, 2009 8:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
I was hoping? ;) (Kidding, kidding!)
February 6, 2009 9:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Republicans aren't trying to fix the bill. Republicans are trying to transform this stimulus bill into a tax cut bill. Tax cuts serve republicans purpose of shrinking government and are pork for upper income individuals. Most tax cuts either have a contracting effect on GDP. The few that have a stimulating effect on GDP have a weaker effect then government spending.
The night before, 36 republicans voted for an all tax cut bill. They called it a stimulus bill. Liars and/or ignorants.
The best economic stimulators are government spending measures. When this bill was put together, the first consideration was shovel ready projects and other job creating measures. The sum total of these projects was inadequate as a stimulus, so they had to add other spending measures for the stimulus to be effective. They added mostly accelerated spending on necessary items we would have had to pay for in the future, items that republicans are now calling pork.
February 6, 2009 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Zowie, party politics is in full gear! First off, my name is Buddy, I am a recovering Republican. I've been off the stuff for around 6 months and I think I'm going to make it. The original post questioned what does government mean to you. I think government is obviously a reflection of our nation whose duty and responsibility is to each of us, the American Tax payer/citizen. I'm not a fan of government for every issue as that was never what government was intended for. Obviously defense, infastructure, and promoting the general welfare and prosperity to ourselves and our posterity..... I don't want to sound too much like my old self but I'm not 100% sure the government is going to get us out of this problem. I know the Bush Admin et. al. got us into this but getting us out is going to be all of our responsibility and task. Throughout the course of human history, I have never read of a government serving as a panacea to anything. If anything, it has served as the catalyst for hardship and suffering.
God Bless President Obama, and God Bless the USA. We're all going to need it.
February 6, 2009 3:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Government means nothing to me. It is one of the worst expressions of human nature. Nothing more, nothing less.
Our government has already taken far more money than it needs to secure our infrastructure and our safety. But that money has gone into the pockets of parasites. Most government agencies do their jobs poorly or not at all, or work in direct opposition to their sworn duties.
February 6, 2009 3:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Apologies for what became a series of way too long comments from me right at the start, Zipper - it kinda blocks off other commenters when it's right up top. Argh. Will be smarter & more civil next time. Anyhoo, thanks dude. q
February 6, 2009 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink