It
is tempting to describe last week�s Congressional battle
over the budget as a spectacle with lots of theatrics reflecting
little more that jockeying for political position. That
would be a mistake. It was much more than that. It involved
weighty substance bearing on the future economic well-being
of millions of people, particularly working people. Perhaps
even more importantly, the future of democracy was also
at stake.
And
still is.
Someone
on television said last week that the bill bearing the name
of House Speaker John Boehner �gave� President Obama an
increase in the debt ceiling. Actually, it was neither the
House Republicans� to give; nor was it Obama�s to receive.
The ceiling has been lifted 77 times since 1917 and it was
never a gift to anybody; it has been a normal process of
government. Never before has the process been a successful
tool for crude extortion.
If
the people who set the Tea Party in motion and sustain it
want a mandatory �balanced budget� there is a democratic
way of going about getting one; introduce specific legislation.
They wouldn�t take that route. Theirs is an awful idea,
it would unlikely ever become law, and more people are coming
to realize that what�s being proposed is just another slimy
maneuver to go after � amongst other things - Medicare,
Social Security and Medicaid.
Some
polls do indicate popular support for a balanced budget
amendment. A lot has to do with how the question is placed.
Responses shift when people are asked whether they favor
such a thing if it means slashing Medicare, Social Security
and Medicaid, or reducing education funding or doing nothing
to stimulate the economy and create jobs.� Another part
in this is the demagoguery about the Federal budget being
the same as one�s household budget, a mythology the President
himself has buttressed with his folksy kitchen table allegories.
�Countries'
debts are not like individual households; they can be serviced
over generations,� commented the British newspaper, The
Guardian Sunday.� �In the aftermath of a credit crunch,
a country that tries simultaneously to cut public and private
debt will suffer prolonged economic stagnation or depression.
The cost in lost opportunity, broken lives and busted businesses
is too high to slash public debt; indeed, the right action
may be to increase it.�
In
the end, the reactionaries didn�t get everything they longed
for last week but the country got shafted nonetheless. And
there�s more to come.
The
economy is in dreadful shape � 14 million people are jobless
- and there�s little hope for significant improvement any
time soon. Indeed, many economists are saying there�s little
more than darkness in the tunnel. This problem wasn�t addressed
in Washington last week, it won�t be addressed next week
as the politicians prepare for vacation, and there is every
reason to believe what they just did is only going to make
matters worse. �It also hobbles the capacity of the government
to respond to the jobs and growth crisis,� economist Robert
Reich wrote Monday in his blog. �Added to the cuts already
underway by state and local governments, the deal�s spending
cuts increase the odds of a double-dip recession. And the
deal strengthens the political hand of the radical right.�
Last
Saturday morning, the New York Times said editorially, �Now
the only hope left for avoiding default on Tuesday is for
the Senate to piece together a compromise that can pass
with bipartisan majorities in both chambers. It will undoubtedly
cut far too much, at a time when the economy can�t afford
it. It will contain no needed revenue increases and could
still trigger a downgrade. But it would eliminate the imminent
threat of financial chaos.� Then, in the afternoon, as it
became clear during Senate debate what the price might be
(and was, as it turned out) to avoid chaos, the paper posted
the next day�s editorial online. It argued that there was
no reason to believe that absent action by the government
�conditions will turn around anytime soon.�
�Indeed,
they are bound to worsen if Congress approves deep near-term
spending cuts as part of a debt-limit deal while letting
relief and recovery measures expire,� the editors said.
�We
will leave it to the historians to figure out how both political
parties, and many Americans, became convinced that austerity
is the road to recovery,� said the Times. �History provides
evidence that it is not, including the premature budget
tightening of 1937 that reignited the Depression.�
No
need to put the weight on historians. The warnings have
been sounded over and over again, by some of the Times�
own political and economic commentators. But overall, the
major media has been woefully derelict and dissenting voices
from the left side of the aisle have been shut out almost
completely.
�What
is at stake is a radical Republican agenda to totally reverse
the progress in economic justice that began with the great
reforms of Franklin Roosevelt and his New Deal,� wrote Robert
Scheer on TruthDig.com July 27. �Consider the direct consequence
of the economic crisis that unfettered Wall Street greed
has wrought, particularly in reversing the gains made by
the most underprivileged sectors of the population.�� Scheer
went on to reference the statistics released last week underscoring
the devastation that the current economic crisis has visited
upon working people and the disproportionate burden borne
by the women, men and children in African America, Latino
and Asian communities.
On
July 27, Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic
and Policy Research (CEPR), wrote on Al Jazeera:
�Policy
debates in Washington are moving ever further from reality
as a small elite is moving to strip benefits that the vast
majority need and support. The battle over raising the debt
ceiling is playing a central role in this effort.
�The
United States is currently running extraordinarily large
budget deficits. The size of the annual deficit peaked at
10 percent of GDP in 2009, but it is still running at close
to 9.0 percent of GDP in 2011. The reason for the large
deficits is almost entirely the downturn caused by the collapse
of the housing bubble. This can be easily seen by looking
at the projections for these years from the beginning of
2008, before government agencies recognized the housing
bubble and understood the impact that its collapse would
have on the economy.
��Remarkably,
both Republicans in Congress and President Obama have sought
to conceal this simple reality. The Republicans like to
tell a story of out-of-control government spending. This
is supposed to be a long-standing problem (in spite of the
fact that Republicans have mostly controlled the government
for the last two decades) that requires a major overhaul
of the budget and the budgetary process. They are now pushing,
as they have in the past, for a constitutional amendment
requiring a balanced budget.
�It
might be expected that President Obama would be anxious
to correct the misconception about the budget, but this
would not fit his agenda either. President Obama is relying
on substantial campaign contributions from the business
community to finance his re-election campaign.�
�In
this respect, the crisis over the debt ceiling is the answer
to the prayers of many people in the business community,�
continued Baker. �They desperately want to roll back the
size of the country�s welfare state, but they know that
there is almost no political support for this position.
The crisis over the debt ceiling gives them an opportunity
to impose cutbacks in the welfare state by getting the leadership
of both political parties to sign on to the deal, leaving
the opponents of cuts with no plausible political options.
�To
advance this agenda they will do everything in their power
to advance the perception of crisis. This includes having
the bond-rating agencies threaten to downgrade U.S. debt
if there is not an agreement on major cuts to the welfare
state.�
Baker
described the battle over the debt ceiling as an �elaborate
charade that is threatening the country�s most important
social welfare programs.�� �There is no real issue of the
country�s creditworthiness of its ability to finance its
debt and deficits any time in the foreseeable future,� he
wrote. �Rather, this is about the business community in
general, and the finance sector in particular, taking advantage
of a crisis that they themselves created to scale back the
country�s social welfare system. They may well succeed.�
Baker�s
contention that both the Republicans and the Democrats were
anxious to broker a deal that would slash (It�s called �reform�)
Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid and the rest �leaving
the opponents of cuts with no plausible political options,�
goes right to the undemocratic nature of everything that
occurred on Capitol Hill last week.
And,
it didn�t end over the weekend. There�s the new bipartisan
commission (or �Super Congress�) that is supposed to sort
this all out behind closed doors and come up with new recommendations
by Christmas, to be voted up or down with limited debate
and no amendments allowed. This time, if the backroom plotters
can�t agree, the cuts will occur automatically.
There
is renewed talk of meeting the goal of the �the President�s
deficit commission.� But there is no such commission goal.
The National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform,
headed by Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles, failed at its
task, its� elite, handpicked 17 members couldn�t agree and
they issued no report. But it won�t die. Give it a little
jolt and it springs back to life, like Dr. Frankenstein�s
monster.
Central
to the defunct commission�s co-chair�s �goal� is the slashing
of Medicare and Social Security. Not wanting to acknowledge
that there is nothing close to a national consensus on doing
such a thing, members of the Washington-Wall Street, elite
who are hell-bent on eviscerating the post-war social compact,
keep the myth of a commission report alive as a template
for each of their efforts. And the major media, either out
of collusion or ignorance, keeps the myth alive.
And
now they are going to try again.
Firedoglake.com
calls the 12-member Super Congress a � Catfood Commission
on steroids - tasked specifically with cutting Social Security
and Medicare benefits over the next few years� designed
�to make it easier to fast-track wildly unpopular benefit
cuts into law while shielding those who vote for cuts from
accountability.�
As
Robert Borosage of the Campaign for America�s Future warns,
�The raw deal sets a precedent that Republican leaders are
already celebrating: from now on, they boast, every debt
ceiling vote will be the occasion for holding the economy
hostage to more extreme demands. A balanced budget constitutional
amendment. A two-thirds vote for any tax hike on the rich.
Privatization of Social Security. The demands will get more
extreme over time.�
One
thing the past week�s events put to rest is any notion of
transparency. It�s been all backroom shuffling by elite
players. Even members of Congress have complained of being
kept in the dark. It is therefore little wonder that, as
Stanley Greenberg wrote in the Times Sunday, lots of voters
tune out the politicians� and express sentiments like these:
�It�s just words� and say things like:
�There�s
just such a control of government by the wealthy that whatever
happens, it�s not working for all the people; it�s working
for a few of the people.� �We don�t have a representative
government anymore.�
The
�bipartisan� measure cobbled together in Congress over the
weekend did not, thank the lord � for now - do the dirty
deed on Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid. Although
you wouldn�t know it relying on the major media, much of
the credit for that is due to grassroots action by senior
advocacy groups, unions and others, and sustained resistance
from parts of the Democratic Party leadership, especially
members of the Congressional Black and Progressive caucuses.
But the battle has only just begun; the slashers have set
the stage for doing it later - by hook or by crook.
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.
|