More than once in the morning after
the President�s jobs speech, I had the same conversation:
�it�s more than I expected.� �It�s a far cry from enough.�
�It doesn�t really matter because the Republicans will kill
it.�
Therein
lay the quandary for progressives. Should we rally around
a program that is deficient, or continue to press for more
effective measures? My answer has been: both.
Unquestionably, passage of the American
Jobs Act would be a good thing. As the President outlined
it, the proposal aims to �to put more people back to work
and more money in the pockets of those who are working,�
and �create more jobs for construction workers, more jobs
for teachers, more jobs for veterans, and more jobs for
long-term unemployed.� To say that it doesn�t matter is
to turn our backs on the millions of people out there struggling
to maintain themselves and their families amid a faltering
economy. �It�s not nearly as bold as the plan I�d want in
an ideal world,� wrote economist Paul Krugman. �But if it
actually became law, it would probably make a significant
dent in unemployment.�
Will the jobs plan �provide a jolt
to an economy that has stalled, and give companies confidence
that if they invest and if they hire, there will be customers
for their products and services�? Well, it�s hard to say.
Every day, the economic crisis appears to get worse. The
President says the economy has stalled. Some economists
suggest it has stalled like an airplane that has lost engine
power and is poised to begin another descent. Combine what
is happening here at home with developments in Europe
and you have the makings of this current crisis of capitalism
turning really ugly.
At the moment, it seems to me, we
should endeavor to put aside our policy wonk hats and concentrate
on the politics of the situation. The battle lines are pretty
clear: It�s the White House proposal, or doing nothing.
There�s nothing else on the table. AFL-CIO President Richard
Trumka holds out hope that the pot will be sweetened. �The
plan announced by the president is only the opening bid,�
he said. �We expect to see more proposals in the next weeks
and months to put America back to work.�
We shall see.
The
danger remains that those in the Administration�s camp who
are never anything but political operatives will prevail,
opportunity will give way to political expediency and fall
prey to the notion that the 2012 election trumps all. That
camp argues that all that matters is the vote of ill-defined
�independents� and everything must be �bi-partisan� That
notion should have been put to rest by the most recent Republican
Presidential candidates debate. The GOP has no plan for
job creation. The candidates presented a united front: the
issue in the next election is �Obama.� They seem to have
figured out that the public is more concerned with unemployment
than deficit reduction, and if the jobs crisis is to be
pinned on the President then surely nothing should be done
to alleviate it over the next 13 months.
�Helping the country is unlikely
to be enough of an incentive for Republicans to pass a bill,
any bill, that Obama supports, even a bill, like this one,
that is assembled mostly from refurbished spare parts collected
from their own ideological warehouse,� wrote Hendrik Hertzberg
in The New Yorker blog. �No doubt many of them sincerely
believe that the end (upping the chances of defeating Obama
and his nefarious agenda of turning America
into a socialist hellhole like Western
Europe) justifies the means (deepening the extent of mass
unemployment, human suffering, and ancillary damage to the
economy and to society).�
The Republican approach to tackling
unemployment was well summed up by Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.),
who said the party was hoping the President would roll back
regulations, take up entitlement reform, facilitate the
production of more energy, and spur free-trade agreements.
Obama has already done too much regulation
reform with his relaxation of air quality standards. Of
course, the GOP wants to take a hatchet to Social Security,
Medicare and Medicaid. More energy means mountain top strip
mining, and dangerous shale oil pipelines, courtesy of the
big oil companies. As far as trade pacts are concerned,
Corker evidently wasn�t listening when Obama said, � Now
it�s time to clear the way for a series of trade agreements
that would make it easier for American companies to sell
their products in Panama, Colombia, and South Korea � while
also helping the workers whose jobs have been affected by
global competition. If Americans can buy Kias and Hyundais,
I want to see folks in South
Korea driving Fords and Chevys and
Chryslers. I want to see more products sold around the world
stamped with three proud words: �Made in America.��
That�s another question. In the real
world, such agreements are not the panacea they are touted
to be; sometimes they have devastating effects on working
people at both ends of the pacts.
Then, there was the out-to-lunch
John Podhoretz writing in the New York Post that
the President �did propose incentives to private-sector
employers, but those incentives do not involve much in the
way of lessening their regulatory or tax burden. Obama mentioned
he had initiated a review of onerous federal regulations
but had so far identified only 500 he could do away with.�
Only 500? (I cringe to think what
they might be).
�And he spoke once again of making
the wealthy pay more in taxes, which directly affects the
ability of small-business owners to employ more people,�
Podhoretz went on. Actually the two things have very little
to do with each other. The Administration�s proposed hiring-tax
incentives are intended for small business.
�The President has delivered a good
start for putting Americans back to work that includes elements
we as progressives have been calling for,� read a joint
statement from Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chairs
Reps. Raul M. Grijalva and Keith Ellison following the president�s
speech. �Our country will finally make essential repairs
to America�s
roads and bridges. Wall Street and multi-millionaires will
start to pay their fair share and support the country that
has helped them prosper. The long-term unemployed, who have
been hit hardest by the recession, will have the support
they need while they find jobs.�
�For eight months, the Republicans
have successfully paralyzed the national conversation by
holding the people�s business hostage. They have shown no
interest in putting the livelihoods of millions of working
families ahead of their own narrow political goals. They
have refused to take job creation seriously. As a result,
we have seen record numbers of laid-off teachers, returning
veterans struggling to find work, and firefighters and first
responders hurting for funding.�
�The crisis is so severe that we
must do more than the president has proposed,� the Caucus
leaders said September 9. �That�s why next week the Congressional
Progressive Caucus will unveil our Framework to Rebuild
the American Dream. It offers a bold, comprehensive progressive
vision for America
based on what we can do, not the Tea Party vision of what
America can�t do. As we showed with the People�s
Budget, we can create millions of jobs and eliminate the
deficit within ten years if we choose the right priorities
and make good decisions.�
�We
join the President in calling on Congressional Republicans
to put the national interest ahead of partisan stonewalling.
We stand ready to move forward and put American families
back to work.�
Back to the quandary.
A reoccurring theme in much of the
media commentary on the Obama proposals has been futility,
summed up by a Washington Post columnist�s declaration
that �long before the speech, both sides had concluded it
didn�t much matter: Obama has become too weak to enact anything
big enough to do much good.�
�I thought it was a great speech,�
the columnist quoted Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) as saying.
�But the odds of Obama getting his plan through Congress
are probably as good as the Nationals winning the league
this year.�
Liberal columnist, Harold Meyerson,
called the President�s speech: �Good plan, good vision,
good politics - That was an enlivened President Obama we
saw earlier this evening - impassioned, indignant, non-professorial,�
he wrote in the Washington Post. �And enlivened he
should have been, because the American economy trembles
on the brink of a double-dip recession, and the Republican
opposition has been seized by an ideology that would erode
what remains of the once-great American middle class. Not
to mention, Obama�s own political future and that of his
party are on the line as well.�
�The size and the substance of this
new stimulus give Obama and his party the ability not only
to rally many of his disenchanted core supporters but to
reach out to voters in the middle of the political spectrum,�
wrote Meyerson. �That�s partly because more than half the
package - roughly $240 billion - takes the form of a one-year
payroll tax reduction for employees and employers that will
be difficult for Republicans to oppose. The
tax credits for employees who hire veterans are also a political
winner, though the tax credit for companies that hire the
long-term unemployed (which in Republican-speak will mean
minorities, whose votes they�re not going to get anyway)
is one that the GOP is almost sure to resist. Also likely
to meet a Republican rejection are Obama�s proposals to
build roads and schools, and to fund the retention and rehiring
of tens of thousands of teachers.�
Perhaps the most overused word this
year has been �compromise� and we�re going to hear it a
lot more over coming weeks. The danger here is that if the
compromisers in the Administration � the ones too often
anxious to split the difference with the opposition - hold
sway, the Republicans and their �blue dog Democratic allies
will get what their corporate backers want (the tax cut
part) while the long-term jobless, the teachers, students
and poor people are left out in the cold.
But wait. It gets worse. Those who
want to take a knife to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid
are still lurking out there. And the President isn�t helping
matters with his repeated ambiguous statements about �reforming�
Medicare. He says this is necessary because of �an aging
population and rising health care costs� Why not tackle
the latter instead of taking from the elderly? Robert Borosage
of the Campaign for America�s
Future noted �the president went out of his way once more
to put Medicare and Medicaid on the table for a grand bargain
with Republicans for dramatic deficit reduction over the
next decade. He promised to detail this in another presentation
next week, threatening to once more deflate the debate we
need over jobs with a return to a debate that is utterly
divisive over deficit reduction.�
Then, there is another problem with
the President�s plan. �Putting Americans back to work is
also critical to keeping Social Security and Medicare strong,�
says Max Richtman, president of the National Committee to
Preserve Social Security and Medicare. �However, this proposal
to extend and expand the payroll tax cut threatens Social
Security�s independence by forcing the program to compete
for limited federal dollars from general revenues, and by
breaking the link between contributions and benefits. As
we predicted back in December, �There�s no such thing as
a temporary tax cut.� Just months after being reassured
that diverting contributions from Social Security would
last for just one year, Congress is now being asked to extend
and even increase this diversion of payroll taxes for another
year. Doubling-down by also cutting employer contributions
greatly worsens the situation, and makes it even harder
to restore the Social Security system to self-financing.
If this extension passes, there is no guarantee that Congress
won�t be asked to extend it yet again, for a 3rd or even
a 4th year or longer, and expand it even more, making it
a de facto permanent part of the tax code. This is death
by a thousand cuts.
�Social Security is paid for, earned
by, and promised to American workers. We call on the President
and the Congress to reaffirm the fact that Social Security
has been, is, and will continue to be, a self-financed insurance
program; and that this temporary payroll tax cut does not
constitute a precedent that would undermine this principle.�
Ari
Berman wisely asked in The Nation, �Could Obama�s
to-be-determined deficit speech undermine the momentum from
his jobs speech? Perhaps,� he continued, �The president
left open the possibility for significant changes to Medicare
and Medicaid, which won�t be popular with many Americans.
The super-committee still has the power in Washington. Once its deadline nears, the conversation may once again
revolve around deficits instead of jobs, especially since
there�s no built-in incentive forcing the committee to focus
on jobs, as compared to the triggered spending cuts.�
Labor leader Trumka Richard L. Trumka
clearly senses the danger here. In the P.S. to his statement
welcoming the President�s speech, he said. �Some politicians
claim cuts to our social safety net, deregulation and lower
taxes for the rich will fix our problems. But they�re flat
wrong. If we continue down this road, it only will destroy
more jobs and send us into a vicious downward spiral. Our
country is too good and too rich to weaken our commitment
to safety net protections such as Social Security, Medicare,
Medicaid and unemployment insurance.
�We don�t have time to waste on the
same old failed policies that drove our economy off a cliff
in the first place. Tell Congress: Working families will
judge our elected leaders by whether they act with integrity
and energy to create good jobs now.�
�Progressives are demanding action
on jobs,� wrote Borosage. �An inspired president on the
stump is vital to making that case. His agenda is a first
step, designed to attract bipartisan support. If Republicans
oppose this, they will be turning their backs on working
people, either out of misguided ideological extremism, or
for partisan political advantage. The president is right.
It is time to act.
�President Obama has taken a step
in the right direction with his speech and jobs plan. It
was a small step - but it has to be to present Republicans
with the choice to cooperate or get pushed out of the way,�
said Dave Johnson of the Campaign for America�s future. �If this
passes it is a win for jobs and the economy - and therefore
the President�s re-election. If Republicans block it, the
President wins because voters will push Republicans out
and the country will be able to get moving again. But it
all depends on follow-through. The President has to keep
out there, pounding on this, and only this, every single
day until there is a vote. Every. Single. Day. That is the
key.�
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. |