The Democratic President is becoming a victim of his own attempt to craft an economic recovery plan acceptable to Republicans. They want to remove everything that will help in the future.
What’s the price of bipartisanship? How long does it pay to keep trying to achieve it? And at what point will Obama start asking himself whether his love of broad compromise isn’t creating too many victims, too many cuts in the plan he believes is necessary to restore America’s economic health?
It finally came down to Friday evening when, after daylong negotiations, two, maybe even three Republican Senators indicated their willingness to agree to the new President’s economic plan – two or three out of more than forty conservatives!
But they only agreed after they could claim one victory for their side. They agreed after they had succeeded in cutting about $400 billion out of the nearly one trillion-dollar package. In so doing, they claimed they put the brakes on Democratic wastefulness, cutting only those items that didn’t lead directly to immediate job creation.
That’s really taking a short-term view of things because when examined in the light of day it wasn’t useless pork projects like Alaska’s bridge to nowhere that were cut but items central to Obama’s reform program, i.e., $40 billion federal aid to states in financial difficulty, $20 billion for school rehabilitation and new construction, $8 billion to upgrade energy efficiency in public buildings, $2 billion to provide broadband internet access to rural areas, $1 billion for pre-school child education, and so forth.
The initial allure of Obama’s budget package lay in the fact that it would quickly create new jobs while simultaneously laying the groundwork for jobs in the future by providing future economic choices for the 21st century: for an improved infrastructure, for green technology, for education relevant to future needs and internet access for all.
But Obama’s desire to rehabilitate the nation on a bi-partisan basis now threatens to derail the chance for real revolution in America. In exchange for their support, some Republicans are demanding funding cuts and restraint precisely in those areas where the nation must now forge ahead with funding: education, ecology and financial aid to states in trouble.
From coast to coast, state governors have no idea how they will be able to pay their bills and still maintain balanced budgets. As usual, they’re cutting in areas that will do the most damage in the future: schools and universities, health care provision and social services will all go under the knife. On Friday, California furloughed 200,000 government workers without pay. They will be told to stay home every first and third Friday of the month, and they will have their salaries cut by nine percent.
Barack Obama came on the scene hoping to bridge the ideological gap between Republicans and Democrats. In his inaugural address he reiterated that it wasn’t a matter of whether there should be more or less government, but that the government should be able to effectively get a grip on the problems confronting the nation.
But we’re seeing the same old fights break out once again. They will continue and they will become more vehement because a majority of Republicans will hold to their old convictions: government should stay as far away as possible from the economy, education and future planning and leave everything to individuals and the free market.
Of course a president like Obama, who sees things somewhat differently, will have to get a majority to support him – not only publicly but also in Congress because, in the end, the majority rules in America. The next round begins next week when the bill goes back to committee to work out differences between the Senate and House versions and they present a final bill for Obama’s signature. On the first try in the House, every Republican voted against the bill.
But the decisive question is whether Barack Obama and the Democrats will allow Republicans to cut those important items necessary in the future for the sake of immediate relief.
“But the decisive question is whether Barack Obama and the Democrats will allow Republicans to cut those important items necessary in the future for the sake of immediate relief.”
The short answer is yes the democrats will indeed allow the republicans to control the outcome of this so-called stimulus package. If you lived in America and have watched the democrats for the last three or four decades you would see clearly the democrats don’t have a spine for taking on the republicans. I.e. they are spineless.
They allowed alpha dog bush to fund his illegal war for many years. Bush jr wanted to be a war president and the democrats folded like a deck of cards and gave bush his illegal war. It is interesting to me how some countries don’t quite get it when it comes to American politics. Obama is a democrat first and a great giver of speeches second. When you come to understand that simple axiom then you will have some deep insights into American politics.
America is a declining nation in wealth and standard of living and rather than except that the government is using printed money and borrowed money trying to convince the American people this is only a recession. Any politician that would state that America is a declining country in wealth would find themselves without a job next election. Obama rode to victory on hope not reality.
Recessions are temporal declining wealth of a nation is permanent. Give the citizens’ popcorn and peanuts i.e. a stimulus package and it might get you reelected next term. America is a completely different country (culture) than when FDR was president and to think the same approach will work as it did in the 1930’s is naive.
Even fewer Americans understand how our imperialism and war machine has contributed to this decline. Super power status is of the ego even nations have egos. I.e. especially nations have egos Germany should understand that better then anyone in the world.