Hey, back from our wonderfully awesome vacation, and still the stupid debt limit fight is raging. Geez.
It is rather amazing to me, although not that shocking or surprising, that the Republicans are willing to trash the good credit of the U.S. just to keep the tax rates of the super-wealthy low. And some want to lower them further!
Here we are mired in a ton of debt, and all the Republicans can think of is tax cuts, tax cuts, TAX CUTS!! They are willing to destroy the country to defeat Obama. That is dangerous and childish, two words that well describe today's Republican Party. It's quite revealing that the Republicans readily raised the debt limit FIVE TIMES when Dubya was President, but now, suddenly, with a Democratic President, it's NO NO NO!!! What a rancid pile of hypocrisy. Par for the course. And we wonder why people are
Some vacation pics to come soon, like the one at the top of the blog.
The Opposing Party
by Nicholas Kristof
Senator Mitch McConnell has a
clever plan to resolve the federal debt impasse. Congressional Republicans would invite President Obama to raise the debt ceiling on his own, and then they would excoriate him for doing so.
Hm. Just a bit contradictory?
Meanwhile, the impasse arose because Congressional Republicans thunder against government red ink, yet refuse to raise revenue by ending tax breaks that help Warren Buffett pay a lower tax rate than his receptionist (which
he agrees is preposterous).
Another contradiction? Of course.
Senator McConnell’s plan — a pragmatic way to avert a catastrophic default — may be torpedoed by more extremist House Republicans, like Michele Bachmann. They seem to fear that ending tax loopholes for billionaire fund managers would damage a fragile economy. Yet they seem to think that this invalid of an economy would be unperturbed by the risk of a default on our debts.
A contra- — yes, you got it!
What about this one? Republicans have historically been more focused on national security threats than Democrats. Yet what would do more damage to America’s national security than a possible default that
might halt paychecks for American military families?
This game of “spot the contradiction” is just too easy with extremist Republicans; it’s like spotting snowflakes in a blizzard. Congressional Republicans have taken a sensible and important concern — alarm about long-term debt levels, a genuine problem — and turned it into a brittle and urgent ideology.
Politicians in both parties have historically been irresponsible with money, but President Bill Clinton changed that. He imposed a stunning fiscal discipline and set the United States on a course of budget surpluses, job growth and diminishing federal debt — until the Republicans took over in 2001.
In the Bush years, Republicans proved themselves reckless both on the spending side (unfunded wars and a prescription drug benefit) and on the revenue side (the Bush tax cuts). Their view then was, as former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill quoted Vice President Dick Cheney as saying, “Reagan proved deficits don’t matter.”
It may seem odd that Republicans were so blithe about debt in the Bush years, yet now insist on addressing the problem in the middle of a downturn — even though basic economics dictates that a downturn is the one time when red ink is advisable. Well, just another of those contradictions.
Then there’s the rise of health care costs, a huge burden on our economy. The Congressional Budget Office foresees a rise in
federal spending on health care from 5.5 percent of gross domestic product today to more than 12 percent in 2050 (at which point it will be double the share of spending on Social Security).
“The United States’ standing in the world depends on its success in constraining this health care cost explosion,”
Peter Orszag, the former budget director, observes in Foreign Affairs. So how do we contain health care costs?
It’s pretty clear what doesn’t work — the existing, dysfunctional system. A forthcoming book on health care by
Paul Starr, “Remedy and Reaction,” notes that in 1970 the United States spent a smaller fraction of income on health care than Denmark and the same share as Canada. Today, in dollar terms, we spend two and a half times the average per capita of other rich countries.
When Congressional Republicans do talk about health care, they have one useful suggestion — tort reform — and it was foolish for Democrats (in bed with trial lawyers) to stiff them on it. But research suggests that curbing malpractice suits, while helpful, would reduce health costs only modestly.
Beyond that, the serious Republican idea is to dismantle Medicare in its present form. That would indeed reduce government spending, but would increase private spending by even more, according to the C.B.O.
The Obama health care plan could have done better on cost control, but it does promote evidence-based medicine, so that less money is squandered on expensive procedures that don’t work. And a panel of medical experts, the
Independent Payment Advisory Board, will recommend steps to curb excess spending in Medicare. These initiatives will help hold down health care costs, even if it’s difficult to know how much — and they are the only game in town.
Yet Congressional Republicans are trying to kill the Obama health plan. Yes, of course: another contradiction.
A final puzzle concerns not just the Republican Party but us as a nation. For all their flaws, Congressional Republicans have been stunningly successful in framing the national debate.
Instead of discussing a jobs program to deal with the worst downturn in 70 years, we’re debating spending cuts — and most voters say in polls that they’re against raising the debt ceiling. I fear that instead of banishing contradictions, we as a nation may be embracing them.
Original.
