See other Editorial Articles
Title: Divided We Fail By PAUL KRUGMAN
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Oct 30, 2010
Author: pk
Post Date: 2010-10-30 09:38:04 by tom007
Keywords: None
Views: 127
Comments: 14
Divided We Fail By PAUL KRUGMAN Published: October 28, 2010 * Recommend * Twitter * comments (413) * Sign In to E-Mail * Print * Reprints * ShareClose o Linkedin o Digg o Mixx o MySpace o Yahoo! Buzz o Permalink o Barring a huge upset, Republicans will take control of at least one house of Congress next week. How worried should we be by that prospect? Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times Paul Krugman Go to Columnist Page » Blog: The Conscience of a Liberal Readers' Comments Readers shared their thoughts on this article. * Read All Comments (413) » Not very, say some pundits. After all, the last time Republicans controlled Congress while a Democrat lived in the White House was the period from the beginning of 1995 to the end of 2000. And people remember that era as a good time, a time of rapid job creation and responsible budgets. Can we hope for a similar experience now? No, we can’t. This is going to be terrible. In fact, future historians will probably look back at the 2010 election as a catastrophe for America, one that condemned the nation to years of political chaos and economic weakness. Start with the politics. In the late-1990s, Republicans and Democrats were able to work together on some issues. President Obama seems to believe that the same thing can happen again today. In a recent interview with National Journal, he sounded a conciliatory note, saying that Democrats need to have an “appropriate sense of humility,” and that he would “spend more time building consensus.” Good luck with that. After all, that era of partial cooperation in the 1990s came only after Republicans had tried all-out confrontation, actually shutting down the federal government in an effort to force President Bill Clinton to give in to their demands for big cuts in Medicare. Now, the government shutdown ended up hurting Republicans politically, and some observers seem to assume that memories of that experience will deter the G.O.P. from being too confrontational this time around. But the lesson current Republicans seem to have drawn from 1995 isn’t that they were too confrontational, it’s that they weren’t confrontational enough. Another recent interview by National Journal, this one with Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, has received a lot of attention thanks to a headline-grabbing quote: “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.” If you read the full interview, what Mr. McConnell was saying was that, in 1995, Republicans erred by focusing too much on their policy agenda and not enough on destroying the president: “We suffered from some degree of hubris and acted as if the president was irrelevant and we would roll over him. By the summer of 1995, he was already on the way to being re-elected, and we were hanging on for our lives.” So this time around, he implied, they’ll stay focused on bringing down Mr. Obama. True, Mr. McConnell did say that he might be willing to work with Mr. Obama in certain circumstances — namely, if he’s willing to do a “Clintonian back flip,” taking positions that would find more support among Republicans than in his own party. Of course, this would actually hurt Mr. Obama’s chances of re-election — but that’s the point. We might add that should any Republicans in Congress find themselves considering the possibility of acting in a statesmanlike, bipartisan manner, they’ll surely reconsider after looking over their shoulder at the Tea Party-types, who will jump on them if they show any signs of being reasonable. The role of the Tea Party is one reason smart observers expect another government shutdown, probably as early as next spring. Beyond the politics, the crucial difference between the 1990s and now is the state of the economy. When Republicans took control of Congress in 1994, the U.S. economy had strong fundamentals. Household debt was much lower than it is today. Business investment was surging, in large part thanks to the new opportunities created by information technology — opportunities that were much broader than the follies of the dot-com bubble. In this favorable environment, economic management was mainly a matter of putting the brakes on the boom, so as to keep the economy from overheating and head off potential inflation. And this was a job the Federal Reserve could do on its own by raising interest rates, without any help from Congress. Today’s situation is completely different. The economy, weighed down by the debt that households ran up during the Bush-era bubble, is in dire straits; deflation, not inflation, is the clear and present danger. And it’s not at all clear that the Fed has the tools to head off this danger. Right now we very much need active policies on the part of the federal government to get us out of our economic trap. But we won’t get those policies if Republicans control the House. In fact, if they get their way, we’ll get the worst of both worlds: They’ll refuse to do anything to boost the economy now, claiming to be worried about the deficit, while simultaneously increasing long-run deficits with irresponsible tax cuts — cuts they have already announced won’t have to be offset with spending cuts. So if the elections go as expected next week, here’s my advice: Be afraid. Be very afraid. A version of this op-ed appeared in print on October 29, 2010, on page A31 of the New York edition.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: tom007 (#0)
There are still people who honestly believe there is a difference between Democrat and Republican politicians and their agendas?
And this gave birth to the coming wipe out of many establishment Rs and entrenched Ds we will witness Tuesday. To that extent, the "reaching across the aisle" strategy worked, and if it is tried by the newbies, they will instantly become an endangered species. I *EVENTUALLY* want a very sharp, clear distinction between pols, not some group of 'get alongs' that Krugman misses so terribly. If it doesn't come, a larger tidal wave will loom for them in '12.
I bet the incumbent reelection rate will be above 90%. Even during the supposed Republican "Revolution" the House reelection rate was 90% and the Senate reelection rate was 92%. The American people have been programmed well to believe that it's the OTHER guy's Senator and/or Representative who is a crook not theirs. Depressing.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976 Nothing in the State, everything outside the State, everything against the State - Jan Lester, Escape From Leviathan "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." - Frederic Bastiat Good order results spontaneously when things are let alone. - Zhuangzi
Yes. there is a difference.
"If ever this vast country is brought under a single government, it will be one of the most extensive corruption, indifferent and incapable of a wholesome care over so wide a spread of surface. This will not be borne, and you will have to choose between reform and revolution. If I know the spirit of this country, the one or the other is inevitable." - Thomas Jefferson
If the polls are truly reflective of what will happen Tuesday, app 50 new
people will be in the House, and app 8 in the Senate. IIRC, 33% of the Senate
is up for election each cycle. A change over of 8 seats, from a pool of 33
incumbents, is a turnover of app 30%. The % in the House is less, but, the the
number of close, formerly "safe" seats, shows an enormous discontent. Lets see
what happens as far as results and sustainability, and most importantly
results. Whoever is swept in needs to be the real deal afa cutting costs &
knocking back the PC, affirmative action agenda. If they aren't, your guess
for '12 will be good as mine. I do know if not for the ballot box, we have the
cartridge box, so all isn't lost.
If all 50 get elected to the house that will be an 88.5 reelection rate. We haven't seen anything like that since 1992. There are actually 37 seats up for election this year so if all eight win then it will be a 78% reelection rate. That hasn't happened since '86. That's better than nothing, but the devil is in the details. How many of those 50 House newbies are career criminals (i.e. career politicians) in good standing with the two party fraud? The same for the Senate. As an example, Roy Blunt is going to likely be the new Senator for Missouri. He was the number three man in the House during the entire Bush administration. He wrote the "free" meds for geezers legislation and helped push every piece of liberal, big government/police state legislation passed during the Bush years. The man who will replace him in the House is literally a Blunt clone. I can't help but wonder how many others are going to be just like this. We'll just have to see how it works out. If history is any indication, it won't matter because the party only backs those they can be sure will not rock the boat and get in the way of their plans. For an example just look at how they've washed their hands of Christine O'Donnell in Delaware. They would rather lose the seat to a Democrat than back a non-vetted candidate. They've been doing the same thing to Ron Paul for years. I am much more pessimistic than you are. We'll see what happens. Hopefully you will be right and I will be wrong.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976 Nothing in the State, everything outside the State, everything against the State - Jan Lester, Escape From Leviathan "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." - Frederic Bastiat Good order results spontaneously when things are let alone. - Zhuangzi
I'm sure we both can agree on this; if the newbies do not *dramatically* begin to change to culture of congress, all bets are off for how and where the voter anger will be channeled in '12. At any rate, Tuesday night will be fun, especially if some old hags and salts get kicked to the curb.
Maybe if I lived in another state I wouldn't be so glum. I have yet to get over the fact that Missouri "conservatives" (yeah right) are so far left that they rewarded Roy Blunt with a primary win. To pour salt on the wound, the (supposedly) most conservative district in the whole damn state voted for a Blunt clone to replace him in the House. sigh.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976 Nothing in the State, everything outside the State, everything against the State - Jan Lester, Escape From Leviathan "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." - Frederic Bastiat Good order results spontaneously when things are let alone. - Zhuangzi
The Dems and Repub, I guess. Corruption is the problem, not so much the parties.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" It has occured to me that the 2012 election may well be one to remember.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" Roger that.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" The Newbies will be eaten alive by Power. And they will become Powers addicts in three months. This is the eternal problem of government.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" And they will become Powers addicts in three months. This is the eternal problem of government. I wouldn't bet against it. All we can do is fire the shot and see where it lands. it's their asses if they fail.
We have hope I guess.
"Satan / Cheney in "08"
#2. To: tom007, 4 (#0)
In the late-1990s, Republicans and Democrats were able to work together on some issues.
#3. To: Jethro Tull (#2)
And this gave birth to the coming wipe out of many establishment Rs and entrenched Ds we will witness Tuesday.
#4. To: bush_is_a_moonie (#1)
There are still people who honestly believe there is a difference between Democrat and Republican politicians and their agendas?
#5. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#3)
#6. To: Jethro Tull (#5)
#7. To: F.A. Hayek Fan, 4 (#6)
#8. To: Jethro Tull (#7)
I'm sure we both can agree on this; if the newbies do not *dramatically* begin to change to culture of congress, all bets are off for how and where the voter anger will be channeled in '12. At any rate, Tuesday night will be fun, especially if some old hags and salts get kicked to the curb.
#9. To: bush_is_a_moonie (#1)
There are still people who honestly believe there is a difference between Democrat and Republican politicians a
#10. To: Jethro Tull (#2)
If it doesn't come, a larger tidal wave will loom for them in '12.
#11. To: F.A. Hayek Fan (#3)
The American people have been programmed well to believe that it's the OTHER guy's Senator and/or Representative who is a crook not theirs. Depressing.
#12. To: Jethro Tull (#7)
if the newbies do not *dramatically* begin to change to culture of congress, all bets are off for how and where the voter anger will be channeled in '12.
#13. To: tom007 (#12)
The Newbies will be eaten alive by Power.
#14. To: Jethro Tull (#13)
All we can do is fire the shot and see where it lands. it's their asses if they fail.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest