Archive for the ‘Domestic Policy’ Category

Government by Empty Rhetoric

Tuesday, June 29th, 2010

The most recent defeat of a jobs bill in the Senate will have far reaching consequences beyond the loss of benefits for the unemployed. The bill included aid to the states, which will not be forthcoming. As Ed Kilgore points out:

Unfortunately, 34 states planned on receiving that money, and its failure to materialize is going to create a whole new round of state budget crises. In many states, we can expect Medicaid cuts and/or reductions in other state spending, quite likely including layoffs of teachers and other public employees. That’s why most Republican state officials did not share the happy-talk of their brethren in Washington about opposing “bailouts of the states.”

State budget cuts will have a baleful effect on the economy, and vague conservative talk that “shringing government” will somehow produce private-sector growth is going to be exposed as illusory.

Kilgore thinks there may be a silver political lining to the Republicans’ refusal to do anything to stimulate the economy.

But there could be political consequences as well, as voters begin to realize that there is no big pot of money labeled “waste, fraud and abuse” that can be tapped to balance state budgets, much less to fund the high-end personal and corporate tax cuts that many Republicans continue to call for in the latest incarnation of the discredited theory of supply-side economics.

In other words, the anti-government populism that conservatives are counting on as electoral magic this November may lose some of its appeal when reality sets in. And Democrats should be quick to point out there is no such thing as a free “austerity” lunch.

Unfortunately, there is no evidence that the public “gets it”. Reality “set in” a long time ago with the financial crisis and consequent recession that was wholly a product of a bankrupt conservative ideology and Republican mismanagement. Yet polls show that voters are poised to put Republicans back in power in the November mid-term elections.

Conservative beliefs continue to circulate in an endless feedback loop, immune to counter-example or evidence and supported by nothing but empty nostrums about “freedom”, “big guvment”, and “free markets”.

Adding Insult to Injury

Wednesday, May 12th, 2010

It is hard to imagine a policy more Un-American that Arizona’s new policy of mandating police to stop anyone who looks “illegal”.

But Arizona is trying desperately to double down on the racism

Under the ban, sent to Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer by the state legislature Thursday, schools will lose state funding if they offer any courses that “promote the overthrow of the U.S. government, promote resentment of a particular race or class of people, are designed primarily for students of a particular ethnic group or advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals.”

As ThinkProgress notes, the Tucson Unified School District’s popular Mexican-American studies department is the target here. The state superintendent charges that the program exhibits “ethnic chauvinism.”

So teaching brown students about their history is equivalent to treason? Who knew?

Meanwhile, in a move that was more covert until the Wall Street Journal uncovered it, the Arizona Department of Education has told schools that teachers with “heavy” or “ungrammatical” accents are no longer allowed to teach English classes.

I’m not sure what an “ungrammatical accent” is. But for kids trying to learn English so they can, you know, assimilate into society, you wouldn’t want them learning from someone they can actually understand.

Where Were the Regulators?

Monday, May 10th, 2010

Via  Robert Reich:

What do oil giant BP, the mining company Massey Energy, and Goldman Sachs have in common? They’re all big firms involved in massive plunder. BP’s oil spill is already one of the biggest and most damaging in American history. Massey’s mine disaster, claiming the lives of 29 miners, is one of the worst in recent history. Goldman’s alleged fraud is but a part of the largest financial meltdown in 75 years.

All three of these companies are also publicly-held, which means that much of the financial costs of these failures will be passed on to their shareholders, many of whom are already watching their stock prices plummet. Prominently among those shareholders are pension funds and mutual funds held by people like you and me.

That may seem fair. After all, shareholders benefited when BP made big profits extracting oil without paying attention to a possible blowout, when Massey Energy got fat earnings from its careless coal mining operations, and when Goldman Sachs did wondrously well for its own stock holders by allegedly defrauding others. In fact, it was pressure from their shareholders seeking the highest possible returns — and their executives, whose pay is linked to the firms’ share performance — that led all three companies to cut whatever corners they could cut in pursuit of profits.

But profits aren’t everything, which is why we have regulations that are supposed to be enforced. So a key question in each of these instances is: Where were the regulators?

Good question. But, of course, if we believe markets know best so we don’t need government meddling in business affairs, we will get the regulators we deserve. That has been the prevailing philosophy for the past 30 years.

When shareholders demand the highest returns possible and executive pay is linked to stock performance, many companies will do whatever necessary to squeeze out added profits. And that will spell disaster - giant oil spills, terrible coal-mine disasters, and Wall Street meltdowns - unless the nation has tough regulations backed up by significant penalties, including jail terms for executives found guilty of recklessness, and vigilant enforcement.

Reich is right. We need strong government regulations. But that means we have to learn once again to trust government. And that means we can’t put people in charge of government agencies who think government is the problem.

No one in their right mind would choose to go to a doctor who did not believe in the power of medicine to heal. Yet, Americans persistently elect government officials who don’t believe that government can be effective.

Clearly, we are often not in our right minds when we vote.