photo: Old Sarge via Flickr
We're going to get more jobs/unemployment numbers today [Update: numbers have just been released. "The United States economy shed 190,000 jobs in October, and the unemployment rate reached a 26-year high of 10.2 percent, up from 9.8 percent in September. . . ."], and as soon as they're out, the first question everyone is going to ask is "where's the Administration's jobs program?"
For that matter, where's the White House on the big questions that need strong leadership?
Steve Benen started an interesting discussion about the direction/priorities Democrats should be pursuing following Tuesday's elections. More from Yglesias. He follows up in this post, posing three possible strategies:
* Go Big: These are Dems who want to generate excitement within the party's base, and run in 2010 on a lengthy record of accomplishments. They envision a scenario in which Dems can pass health care reform, a climate change bill, financial reform, an education bill, immigration reform, and a repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" before the end of next year. It's ambitious, but doable, and would prove that Dems know how to get things done.
* Go Home: These are center-right Dems, generally from "red" states and districts, who believe every one of the votes the Go Big crowd wants is like a nail in the proverbial coffin. They'll drive "independents" away; reinforce negative stereotypes of the party; and motivate the right wing. It's better to scale back, the Go Home contingent believes, slam on the brakes, and focus on issues like deficit reduction.
* Take A Detour: These Dems don't want to crawl into a hole, but they say it's time to reshuffle the party's priorities. The wish list can remain long, just so long as Democrats limit their ambitions, keep issues like the economy on top, and relegate issues like DADT repeal to the bottom. If Dems focus on job creation, the elections will take care of themselves.
Go Big strikes me as the smart course, but I'm not unsympathetic to the Take A Detour crowd. . . .
I'd reverse that and redefine the third strategy. I agree the "go home crowd" should do us all a favor and get out of the way; they're not helping the Democrats or the country, and as Yglesias notes, they have no solutions, for all the hand wringing they're doing. On the other hand, "take a detour" isn't a choice; it's a necessity.
We simply have to do much more to put Americans back to work. Getting unemployment well below it's projected 10 percent (15 percent is more realistic) as rapidly as we can is a moral imperative. It's simply unacceptable to leave things at that level, but that's what we're probably looking at for the next year without a major effort to change it. And, is there any debate that it's a political imperative for Democrats in 2010?
Go Big may sounds attractive, but I honestly don't know what "go big" even means, given the lack of strong leadership (or worse) coming from this White House. The list of things that need major overhaul is daunting, but so far, the White House has been at best compromised on diagnosis and even weaker on follow through. Who is to lead this "go big" strategy?
The remaining strength of the health reform bill depends largely on how far Nancy Pelosi and fellow progressives can push the Blue Dogs and on whether Harry Reid can manage his opportunistic colleagues, none of whom are "go big" types. If there's any meaningful help coming from Rahm/Obama, it's well hidden.
Yesterday, the Republican leadership embraced their party's extremism at a Bachmann rally on the Capitol steps. It was an astonishing, frightening spectacle that proved beyond doubt how (1) crazy, (2) dishonest (3) detached from reality and (4) irresponsible the party has become.
I don't know whether Obama ever believed he could work with a party that has sought to demonize and deligitimize him since January, told him they want him to fail, and is now recklessly toying with an angry, manipulated populist insurrection. But there's no excuse for such delusions now.
With the Republicans now completely irrelevant (see their "health reform plan") and running from all governing responsibility, all the President's attention should be directed at helping Congressional Democratic leaders hold their caucus together and improve the health reform bill. It's not about Obama's agenda; it's about their platform for 2010.
The next jobs/stimulus bill should be drafted now and signed before Christmas, even as they push to get a better health reform bill out as soon as they fix the political mess that Baucus/Rahm left Reid. A financial regulatory reform bill should be right behind, one strong enough to convince Geithner and Summers to resign. Perhaps Congress now understands what a liability they've become.
If the House can't find enough weatherization, renewable energy, healthcare, teacher, infrastructure, reclamation and conservation jobs to fund, just ask the governors and majors. They've had their lists for years, and their worsening budgets are killing the recovery.
More:
Paul Krugman, Obama's Faces His Anzio (and why we need more jobs/stimulus):
If the Democrats lose badly in the midterms, the talking heads will say that Mr. Obama tried to do too much, this is a center-right nation, and so on. But the truth is that Mr. Obama put his agenda at risk by doing too little. The fateful decision, early this year, to go for economic half-measures may haunt Democrats for years to come.
And James Galbraith was right: No Return to Normal
But Republicans are wrong: Bruce Bartlett
No comments:
Post a Comment