The new situation will reopen old rifts in the Democratic Party. One the one side, liberals will argue (are already arguing) that it was deregulation and trickle-down economic policies that led us to this crisis. Fears of fiscal insolvency are overblown. Democrats should use their control of government and the economic crisis as a once-in-a-lifetime chance to make some overdue changes. Liberals will make a full-bore push for European-style economic policies…
Obama will try to straddle the two camps ”” he seems to sympathize with both sides ”” but the liberals will win. Over the past decade, liberals have mounted a campaign against Robert Rubin-style economic policies, and they control the Congressional power centers. Even if he’s so inclined, it’s difficult for a president to overrule the committee chairmen of his own party. It is more difficult to do that when the president is a Washington novice and the chairmen are skilled political hands. It is most difficult when the president has no record of confronting his own party elders. It’s completely impossible when the economy is in a steep recession, and an air of economic crisis pervades the nation.
What we’re going to see, in short, is the Gingrich revolution in reverse and on steroids. There will be a big increase in spending and deficits. In normal times, moderates could have restrained the zeal on the left. In an economic crisis, not a chance. The over-reach is coming. The backlash is next.
#2
Those are good questions to which I’ve never heard a satisfactory answer. What will the PATRIOT Act be in the hands of an activist, Democratic presidency? If it is the mission of the US to topple despots and spread democratic rule, then Sudan, Somalia and Zimbabwe all await President Obama’s tinkering. We’ve expanded Medicare once already; surely we can do so again. If you think No Child Left Behind is insufficient under Bush, don’t worry because some Democrats are going to be drafting the enabling regs pretty soon. And now that the government has nationalized financial services, rest assured a Democratic administration will make sure it services all the right people.
The neo-conservatives who urged deficit spending and an activist Executive contrary to the GOP’s Old Right traditions will segue to positions in a Democratic administration or retreat to their endowment-funded think tanks. The chumps in flyover country will see their childlike faith in government under George Bush repaid, good and hard. We never learn.
If the Democrats can make good on their “change” promises, more power too them, but I think they are about to be given enough political rope to hang themselves, especially if they get the cloture-vote proof 60 seat senate majority.
“The chumps in flyover country” learn way better than you may think. We know (and any perusal of a political map on a state-by-state basis will confirm this) what a democratic Presidency, combined with a majority in both houses of congress (maybe a Senatorial super-majority) will do to the country. We have known since the days when we were the first to question FDR’s “new deal.” But the good folks on the coasts, who tend to think of us as “chumps,” don’t get it that we know. And they don’t get something else, either – – and that is, if “Atlas” in flyover country ever “shrugs,” the rest of the country will wonder what happened. Contrary to what some on the east and west coasts seem to think, chuck roast does not grow in a styrofoam container, and diesel fuel and gasoline does not pop out of the pump, as if by magic. We make those things, we grow those things. You need them. Don’t kid yourselves, we know what a Democratic government can, and likely will, do. But when we try to tell people by coloring our states red, the coasts don’t listen.
Who are the “chumps,” after all?
jkc1945,
Rest assured, the coastal elites will get their beef from Brazil just fine, thank you. In the meantime, why do you support Republicans who expand government when you know very well that George Bush has spent his entire presidency importing a demographic that is poised to hand the Democrats a governing majority for years to come? And the South tried “shrugging” once too–see what happened to us. The military like their regular paychecks and they will see to it that your taxes assure UST’s remain marketable.
I have a suspicion, and a fear, that we are about to enter socialism by way of panic over economics. We are now socializing our banking system, and that is something that is a lot easier to get into than to get out of.
Of course, a lot of the reason we got into this mess was a deregulation of some things that really needed to be regulated, and a lot of semi-socialist corporate welfare programs. More than one sports stadium (including one that was owned in large part by W) was built by local government taking private property for “public use.” The constitution only meant eminent domain for things like bridges and roads – not for taking property from one set of private hands to be used by another with a theoretically higher tax base.
If Barry Goldwater could see what has been done in the name of conservatism, he would probably blow his top.
We need closer regulation of some industries, because things like financial, transportation, and energy companies have a huge and direct impact on the rest of society. They seem to be inclined to do things that will benefit themselves rather than all, and to do things that benefit themselves in the short run while damaging themselves and others in the long run. But regulation is not ownership; it merely sets the stage and defines the limits.
I have a suspicion, and a fear, that we are about to enter socialism by way of panic over economics. We are now socializing our banking system, and that is something that is a lot easier to get into than to get out of.
What is even more frightening is that the rest of the World is socializing its banking system right along with us. If you’re worried about Big Government now, how much easier is Centralized Government on a global scale?
i am sorry i don’t understand. the democrats are leading us to hades in a handbasket? which party has had practically a free hand for the past eight years? i thought it was republicans, i guess i was wrong. i am no politico, but it sure seems like every time a republican is in charge deficits run sky high with no benefit except to rich folks and corporate america. wasn’t it cheney who stated that deficits don’t matter? i thought he represented the typical republican… imho think we are in deficit hades right now and it weren’t no democrats that brought us here.
a) the ‘never met a spending bill I didn’t like’ Republicans were NOT neo-cons. In fact, they abandoned conservative principles at every chance.
b) the Republicans sounded the warning against total deregulation of Fannie and Freddie — it was the Democrats who dismissed their warnings and said “They are sound, and needed to provide affordable housing for the poor” (Barney Frank).
c) The Democrats are in power in both Houses and have been for the past two years (and has seen the lowest — even single-digit — approval rating numbers of any Congress in history). The Constitution gives Congress fiscal responsiblity. If anyone is to blame, look to the Democrats.
d) it’s usually the ones who are to blame who say “we have to avoid casting blame right now” — which is the Democratic Party in this case. If the fault really did lie with the Republicans, you would see special prosecutors and special hearings all over Capitol Hill.
Of course, the “socialism” that is happening now is because under deregulation, people were lying to each other.
I don’t think people have realized that to a large extent the world agrees that some sort of commercial society is what people want. What ideologues of libertarianism have to be reminded about is that people are irrational greedy opportunists.
This is not socialism. Socialism is about having a centrally planned economy. This is holding banks accountable to the investors (iin this case, us, the people of the US), who are bailing them out for their sins. Banks can now loan to others, but since we’re guaranteeing deposits, they’d better keep their books open.
We tried it the deregulatory, supplyside way. And it screwed up because those who benefitted from the free market didn’t want to be held accountable. Now they are being held accountable. If anything, its better capitalism.