We're beginning to get a look at
what happens when the subject of unemployment comes up at
the White House. It ain't reassuring. Jared Bernstein, formerly
chief economic adviser to Vice President Biden, who left
the Administration last month says he "frequently"
argued for forceful action to combat joblessness within
the corridors of power. However,
"There will be no WPA-type programs in our near future.
There was no appetite for them in the Obama admin in the
midst of the worst recession since the Great Depression
and there's a lot less now. The reasons for that are interesting
and I'll speak to them another day. But it ain't happening."
In his blog post May 29, Bernstein
mildly and respectfully and took economist Paul Krugman
to task for constantly writing about what the government
"should" do as opposed to what it can. The reason
Washington can't
do more? It's not in the cards politically. The Republicans
are in the ascendency, he says and, "Yes, it's true
that leaders must stand up to such views and do what's right
for the economy�damn the torpedoes and all that. But those
of us espousing such actions must respect, or at least acknowledge,
that those torpedoes are not pointed at us." Under
such circumstances "there's no point in even contemplating
�coulds'."
Krugman had also proposed "a
serious program of mortgage modification, reducing the debts
of troubled homeowners." Forget about it said Bernstein
who also had cautionary words for the editorial writers
at the New York Times for arguing for such action.
That ain't happening either, he said.
Obviously in response, Krugman wrote
last week, "In pointing out that we could be doing
much more about unemployment, I recognize, of course, the
political obstacles to actually pursuing any of the policies
that might work. In the United States, in particular,
any effort to tackle unemployment will run into a stone
wall of Republican opposition. Yet that's not a reason to
stop talking about the issue. In fact, looking back at my
own writings over the past year or so, it's clear that I
too have sinned: political realism is all very well, but
I have said far too little about what we really should be
doing to deal with our most important problem.
"As I see it, policy makers
are sinking into a condition of learned helplessness on
the jobs issue: the more they fail to do anything about
the problem, the more they convince themselves that there's
nothing they could do. And those of us who know better should
be doing all we can to break that vicious circle."
In
a May 30 column, Krugman wrote that his mention of a WPA-type
program was aimed "at the broader discourse, as well
as the closed-door-off-the-record stuff I've been hearing
from men in suits. Really bad analysis is posing as wisdom,
and it needs to be called out."
Bernstein is right about the determination
of the opposition to serious job creation action. Stan Anderson,
chair of the Chamber of Commerce's Campaign for Free Enterprise, said in a letter to the Times. "Instead of
making more government, such as creating Works Progress
Administration-type programs, as Mr. Krugman suggests, we'd
like to make government better so that creative free enterprise
ideas can flourish in America again." That's
about as ideologically callus as you can get.
"The president is going to be
running for reelection in an economy that's still too weak,"
Bernstein acknowledged a few days later, after the May employment
statistics were released. "It is improving and is in
a far better place than it was when he got there but still
is not adequately lifting the living standards of the broad
middle class."
Of course, while you might not sense
it the way the major media tells the story, the important
victim in this situation is not the President's re-election
prospect; it's the jobless. Their plight would be just as
serious regardless of who was running.
'What do those who are jobless have
in common?" asks economist Robert Reich. "They
lack the political connections and organizations that would
otherwise demand policies to spur job growth. There's no
National Assn. of Unemployed People with a platoon of Washington lobbyists and a war chest of potential
campaign contributions to get the attention of politicians."
(Unlike the very well-to-do folks currently orchestrating
the "deficit reduction" campaign.)
"As a result, too many are likely
to remain unemployed for months if not years. That's bad
news, not only for them but for America,"
says Reich.
"Republican lawmakers have responded
to renewed signs of weakness with a jobs plan that prescribes
more of the same �fixes' that Republicans always recommend
no matter the problem: mainly high-end tax cuts, deregulation,
more domestic oil drilling and federal spending cuts,"
wrote Reich. "The White House has offered sounder ideas,
including job retraining, plans to boost educational achievement
and tax increases to help cover needed spending. But its
economic team is mainly focused on negotiations to raise
the debt limit, presumably parrying Republican demands for
deep spending cuts that could weaken the economy further
while still reaching an agreement on the necessary increase.
"The grim numbers tell an unavoidable
truth: The economy is not growing nearly fast enough to
dent unemployment. Unfortunately, no one in Washington
is pushing policies to promote stronger growth now.'
"The silence is deafening,"
writes Reich. "While the rest of the nation is heading
back toward a double dip, Washington continues to obsess about future budget
deficits. Why?"
"Republicans don't want to do
anything about jobs and wages," says Reich. "They're
so intent on unseating Obama they'd like the economy to
remain in the dumps through Election Day. They also see
the lousy economy as an opportunity to sell Americans their
big lie that government spending is the culprit - and jobs
will return if spending is cut and government shrinks.
Would the Republicans actually impede
any effort to create jobs hoping the unemployment rate will
remain high until the Presidential election? (Oh, you cynic)
It's clear that at least some of them would. Consider the
advice the party received last week from the rightwingers
at Human Events. Erick Erickson, managing editor at redstate.com,
a CNN contributor described credited by some with being
one of the right's important political operatives, told
the group's online readers he thinks Obama can be beat because
joblessness will still be up there next year and the White
House "has no real solutions to fix the economy."
"Reporters keep asking Republicans
what they will do to create jobs,' says Erickson. "The
answer should be obvious. �Nothing!' In fact, I think Americans
are finally starting to embrace that answer. But when the
unemployment rate is so high and inflation is on the rise
and the take home pay of Americans brings home less and
less, yes, I think the President is beatable."
It
doesn't take much reading between the lines to decipher
that message.
"The only tiny possible chink
of light" in the May jobs stats "is that these
numbers are so bad that they might persuade bickering politicians
on Capitol Hill to stop playing stupid games with the debt
ceiling and start concentrating on important matters,"
writes Felix Salmon, a financial journalist and Reuters
blogger. "Oh, who am I kidding: we're in election season
now. Nothing is going to happen, in terms of remotely important
legislation, until 2013, for risk that Obama might be able
to take credit for it."
As I said, our principle concern
here must not be the 2012 Presidential election but the
condition of the almost 12milion people who want to work
and can find no employment. Keep in mind that the 16.2 percent
unemployment rate amongst African Americas is almost double
the overall rate. The unemployment rate for black males
went from 17 percent in April to 17.5 percent in May - the
highest for any group
The May unemployment rate for whites
remained 8.0 percent while the Hispanic rate was 11.9 percent,
up from 11.8 percent. The rate of underemployment (including
the unemployed, marginally attached and those working part-time
for economic reasons) was 15.9 percent up from 15.7 percent.
The ranks of long-term unemployed
(jobless for 27 weeks or more) increased to 6.2 million,
up from 5.8 million or 45.1 percent of all unemployed. These
women and men represent 4.0 percent of the labor force.
The highest percentage for any post-war period was 26.0
percent.
A delegation of Congressional Democrats
met with the President last week and the jobless rate was
discussed. However, according to informed sources, the question
of the long-term jobless and the "99ers" who have
exhausted their unemployment benefits, which had been raised
an at earlier White House confab with the Congressional
Black Caucus, never came up.
"I think right now with great
intentionality we need to concentrate on black unemployment.
If any group in America had a particular problem - let's
say for example that suburban women were unemployed at a
high level - we'd be involved in Washington and we'd bring
the greatest economists that God has placed on the planet
and we would struggle with ways to reduce that number,"
Congressional Black Caucus Chair Emanuel Cleaver told the
House of Representatives the other day. "The figures
confirm this is a persistent problem that will not go away
if this is not addressed."
"Millions are still out of work
and families are still struggling to make ends meet. After
five months of controlling the House, the Republican Leadership
continues to prevent critical jobs legislation from being
considered and passed," said Cleaver.
Another subject nobody in Washing
seems to be too concerned about is that facing young people
just entering the job market who are finding it impossible
to secure their first job. Remember,
they don't have unemployment benefits. People with college
degrees are finding it increasingly hard to secure employment;
many are settling for low paid positions that would otherwise
have gone to less educated job seekers. This only compounds
the calamity facing African Americans. Black teenage unemployment
has risen from 30.4 percent to 40.7 percent over the past
year.
The policy response to the crisis
"was and remains vastly inadequate," wrote Krugman
June 2. "Those who refuse to learn from history are
condemned to repeat it; we did, and we are. What we're experiencing
may not be a full replay of the Great Depression, but that's
little consolation for the millions of American families
suffering from a slump that just goes on and on."
BlackCommentator.com Editorial Board member
Carl Bloice is a writer in San Francisco, a member of the National Coordinating Committee of
the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism and formerly worked for
a healthcare union. Click here to contact Mr. Bloice. |