 |
When the Stimulus Argument Ends, Will Republicans Have Any Relevance? |
 |
Near the beginning of his press conference tonight, President Obama said something that makes very clear why the Republican party stands poised on the brink of irrelevance: “as we’ve learned very clearly and conclusively over the last eight years, tax cuts alone can’t solve all of our economic problems–especially tax cuts that are targeted to the wealthiest few Americans.” He might have changed “eight” to “thirty”–for more than a generation, Republicans have chanted the same mantra of trickle down economics in response to every economic challenge: that tax cuts for the wealthy are the solution.
Most Republicans in the Senate still believe in this disproved theory: 36 of 41 Republicans voted for an amendment to the stimulus bill that would have replaced every bit of spending with tax cuts.
Barack Obama is not a magician and no one can say how quickly his plan will work. But economists across the political spectrum agree that simply cutting taxes is not a solution, and it looks like at least a few Republicans are rational enough to realize this, just enough to vote for an end to debate on the bill in the Senate today.
Obama doesn’t have all the answers, but if, as is looking very likely, the stimulus plan passes both Houses and ends up on his desk (after the bills are reconciled in Congress), the 36 Republicans in the Senate who swore their allegiance to a failed approach run an enormous risk. 14 years ago, Bill Clinton had to declare his relevance as president. Republicans who criticize those who would act to address the worst economic crisis in 75 years but offer nothing other than a failed approach may find themselves in a similar position of having to declare, and prove, their relevance.
Politically, the Republicans are doing the smart thing. If the stimulus passes and succeeds, Obama gets all the credit whether Republicans were on board or not. If they support it and it fails, they have betrayed core party principles to bet on a losing horse.
But the horse they’ve chosen to bet on is that they oppose it and it fails, then in 2010 and 2012, they are in prime position to say, “See, we know what’s best” - and they come sweeping back to power.
That’s politically the smart thing for the Republicans to do. Morally and ethically, though, what they’re doing stinks to high heaven. It’s clear that the welfare of the American people is taking a back seat to their desire to be the party in power again soon.
I think it’s a gamble…they risk making themselves irrelevant. eventually (perhaps even already) people will realize that the Republicans are offering no alternative to Obama’s plan other than a failed, debunked economic theory. But of course nothing is certain….
I think it is kind of a scary thought that Americans will only give Obama two to four years to unburden the economy from eight (or 30) years of mishandling. Scary, but probably right.
Uh, that would be party politics in a nutshell, wouldn’t it?
Yes, but some parties seem a little more quick to sell their souls than others, don’t they?