Arlen Specter on Why He Supported the Stimulus Package; Ross Douthat: "Blame the Centrists"

by Damozel |  Speaking as a progressive, I'd just like to say to Sen. Specter (R-Pa) at the outset, "Next time, please don't bother." 

He says, and up to a point, is right:

I am supporting the economic stimulus package for one simple reason: The country cannot afford not to take action.

The unemployment figures announced Friday, the latest earnings reports and the continuing crisis in banking make it clear that failure to act will leave the United States facing a far deeper crisis in three or six months. By then the cost of action will be much greater -- or it may be too late. (WaPo)

He then praises himself and the other Senators who decided to split the baby to give everyone some of it for their economic moderation. 

"In politics," John Kennedy used to say, "nobody gets everything, nobody gets nothing and everybody gets something." My colleagues and I have tried to balance the concerns of both left and right with the need to act quickly for the sake of our country. The moderates' compromise, which faces a cloture vote today, is the only bill with a reasonable chance of passage in the Senate. (WaPo)

That's because the Senate is crammed to bursting with posturing/bloviating Republicans who are not about to let anyone undo the damage they enabled under Bush and spineless Democrats who are too timid to take responsibility for giving America the stimulus bill we need to minimize the damage from the current meltdown for the people most vulnerable to being damaged.  

See my earlier round-up on Krugman and others who know something about consequences for why this wasn't moderation but mutilation. 

Conservative commentator Ross Douthat mordantly comments:

The liberals are angry, and not without reason. You can imagine a world in which "centrist" Senators used their awesome deal-making powers to forge compromises that incorporate ideas from the left and right alike. A world in which moderate "gangs," in David Brooks' formulation, actually put meat on the bones of Barack Obama's promise to end politics as usual....

But that's not the world we live in. In this world, centrist Senators exist to take politics as usual - whether it's tax cuts in Republican eras, or spending splurges in Democratic ones - and make it ever so slightly more fiscally responsible. So if the GOP wants, say, $500 billion in tax cuts, the country clearly needs $400 billion in tax cuts - but not a penny more! And if the Democrats want $900 billion in stimulus, then the best possible policy outcome must be ... $800 billion in stimulus! To read this Arlen Specter op-ed, justifying both the stimulus package and the cuts the "gang of moderates" have attempted to impose, is to encounter a mind incapable of thinking about policy in any terms save these: Take what the party in power wants, subtract as much money as you can without infuriating them, vote yes, and declare victory....

Now fiscal responsibility is generally a good thing, and so a centrism mindlessly focused on tweaking legislation away from deficit spending has its uses....But thanks to the centrists, we're getting the cheapskate version of the gargantuan version: They've done absolutely nothing to widen the terms of debate about what should go into the bill, and they've shaved off just enough money to reduce its effectiveness if Paul Krugman is right - but not nearly enough to make it fiscally prudent if the stimulus skeptics are right. 

This means that if the damn thing doesn't work, we won't even know whom to blame. But it wouldn't be crazy to start by blaming the centrists. (emphasis added)

Meanwhile --- just so you know --- Rasmussen reports that the majority of Americans --- who, it's safe to say, know nothing about how the stimulus works except what they've been told --- think they'd really prefer tax cuts.  I'm assuming that the people who don't share this view consist of people who understand the purpose of the stimulus bill plus all those who know longer have jobs and -- in consequence -- no income. 

And why have they reached this conclusion?

Mr. Obama...didn’t do something crucially important: speak forcefully about how government spending can help support the economy. Instead, he let conservatives define the debate, waiting until late last week before finally saying what needed to be said — that increasing spending is the whole point of the plan....
(Krugman)

I said last week how much I hoped that his decision to sit on his hands and let the Republicans blowhards do what they do best -- posture and yell nonsense -- was part of some grand scheme or master strategy and maybe it is.  Maybe letting the centrists have their way with the stimulus package was as well.    (Andrew Sullivan still thinks so, anyway).  But what price a grand strategy if you lose this particular battle?  Sometimes losing a critical battle means losing the whole war.

Memeorandum has more....

RECENT RELATED BUCK NAKED POLITICS POSTINGS

Bipartisan for Bipartisan's Sake Part 2: Krugman & Others on What It Gets Us

Regulators Close Three More Banks

Economists Want Stimulus Package Soon, "Free Market" Folks Flip-Flop Again

Bipartisanship for Its Own Sake: "Deal" "Reached" on Economic Stimulus Bill Following

Free-Style Spending Cuts (News & Blogger Round-Up)

Treasury Over-Paid Bailout Funds by $80 Billion?

Record High U.S. Jobs Loss, Yet Republicans Want Tax Cuts for Wealthy Folks

Krugman says Economy Poised at Cliff's Edge, Political Theater Must Stop

Obama Knows What You Need, Even If He Won't Tell You: "Now is the Time [for Bipartisan Horse-Trading] (The Op-Ed)

Comments

[melissa kaffen]

The venerable Mr. Specter is no more a Republican than the Tooth Fairy. At least she has a real job.