Why Is the Government So Hysterical?

Well-informed people will have their own view about President Obama’s stimulus package. Here’s mine: I believe Congress can (and should) pass legislation that would help stimulate the economy; the most effective, efficient stimulus Congress can provide, in my view, would involve tax cuts as opposed to a hodge-podge of new spending. If I’m reading the papers right, though, many of the spending plans in the president’s bill won’t have any stimulative effect at all.

But reasonable people can differ. I’m less concerned about the specifics of the bill, though—Congressional pork has been with us since the dawn of the Republic—than I am with the tone of the rhetoric being employed to sell it. The people boosting the bill don’t just sound concerned; they’re apocalyptic. They seem to be deliberately talking the economy down in order to get their Christmas tree of a spending bill passed. It’s as if they want to deliberately kill the economy so that they can save it.

Take, for instance, New York Sen. Charles Schumer, who’s in such a hurry to pass the bill he doesn’t seem to think individual items in it should be debated at all. “Why quibble over $200 million?” he told MSNBC the other morning, dismissing concern over one or another’s of the bill’s line items. "If we waited too long and we’re in a depression you can be sure on this show and the other the historians would say, ‘what did they dither for’?” So by Schumerian logic, it’s either vote for the bill ASAP or the country’s not just in a severe recession, it’s in a depression.

Sorry, Senator. When you get a 600-page bill with thousands of spending items that add up to over $800 billion, people are going to want to debate it! Alternatively, if you’re as panicked about depression as you say, take all the junk out and leave only the high-octane stimulus in. In a perfect world, the stimulus package would be split into several pieces, so the people in Congress could take the time to read it all and know what they were voting on. I know I’m not the only one who believes that the bill contains all kinds of programs which would never pass if they were debated on their own merits.

Then there’s Pennsylvania’s Republican senator, Arlen Specter, who wrote an op-ed in Monday’s Washington Post entitled “Why I Support the Stimulus.” Sure enough, he’s in full-bore panic mode:

Specter said:

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

Senator, hello! No piece of legislation, including this monstrosity, is going to turn the economy around in three to six months. And it’s simply outrageous—even irresponsible—to claim that if the bill isn’t passed, “it may be too late.”

Too late for what? Too late to provide wheelbarrowfuls of pork to your constituents that you wouldn’t have been able to deliver to them otherwise, had Congress considered that same pork on its own merits? As it happens, the U.S. economy has shown, again and again, an astounding underlying strength and a dependable ability to revive itself without help from Washington. People like to look to FDR’s New Deal as a template for what the government should be doing now. Unfortunately, a) the economy’s in nowhere near the dire straits now it was in then, and b) one can argue, convincingly, that a lot of the steps Roosevelt took in the 1930s ended up making things worse. At a minimum, the last thing the economy needs now is the deliberate, hyperbolic talking-down that the country’s political leaders seem so eager to engage in.

Which gets us to our new president, who seems more than eager to play the fear card. In Elkhart, Indiana on Monday, President Obama said that if the stimulus bill doesn’t pass, “. . . our nation will sink into a crisis that, at some point, we may be unable to reverse.”

Unable to reverse? For the record, the recession so far isn’t even as bad as the one that occurred in 1981, let alone as bad as the Great Depression. Yet the President flatly states that unless Congress passes his vast stew of a bill, the country will enter into a period of permanent economic decline. This is not FDR-ish (or even Reaganesque) optimism many voters must have thought they were voting for. It is the opposite of that. Not only is Obama’s view flat wrong, he offers it in the gloomy sort of tone that figures to take a bad situation and make it worse. Nice leadership.

In fact, with or without President Obama’s bill, this country will survive and prosper. The only question is when the turn will happen.

I won’t like what’s in the stimulus bill that finally passes. Nobody will—each for different reasons. That’s politics. But I am especially disappointed that our elected officials have opted to sell the bill by preying on the fears of Americans, rather than explaining why they think it makes sense to borrow massive amounts of money to fund programs they say will be good for the country in the short, intermediate, and long-term.

There’s an argument to be made, surely. But the alternative, wolf-crying strategy isn’t helping make things better.

Comments

[@TexasER:]

Every good politician finds windmills to tilt at. The bogey man. Fear and hate motivate people. FDR had bankers and breadlines. Reagan had communists. Bush had terrorists. Obama, has bankers and breadlines..and Bush. (i.e. capitalists).

Fun exercise: Take any war on ____ speech. Do a search and replace on _____. Find a difference.

Feb 11 12:13 PM

[market ace:]

It amazes me that people waste their time even talking about this stim bill. It is outrageous and nothing but a Pelosi Christmas list that will not stimulate much, if anything, but meanwhile no one sees this as the diversion it really is, while trillions are being shoveled out the back door to Wall Street banks that are beyond repair and no one even shows the least concern.. This multi-trillion dollar bailout is like moving furniture into a burning house while the firemen stand idly by and will this bring America to its knees. but congress and the press just play dead on the issue.

Feb 11 12:24 PM

[Crank Monkey:]

Plan A: Timmy rescues the banking system.

Plan B: Lassie rescues Timmy.

Feb 11 12:58 PM

[ROLEX18:]

Government is hysterical because they already took all your money and they afraid that crime, unemployment will reach such proportions that it will be out of control.
When government loses control, it loses it's power and people go on the streets to steal, kill, rape this is called REVOLUTION.

Feb 11 01:22 PM

[speculari:]

Good job Tom! Thanks! I share your concerns & agree with your comments re: Messrs. Schumer, Specter & Obama.
What is also interesting is the "deconstruct" between the President & various of his appointees - perhaps Geithner is the current & pre-eminent example.
One would like to see this President succeed for the benefit of us all..... but, a few more gaffes, guffaws & "surprises" may well render this man's eloquence... to nothing more than the posturing & pandering of a populist popinjay!

Feb 11 01:56 PM

[Thomas J. G...:]

I like the comments on Obama's scare tactics. He IS the gov't now, not running anymore. He needs to think positive, talk positive, and make others feel positive. This is the same country it was a year ago. Same people, same resources, same institutions. We'll pull out of this.

... Flash

Feb 11 04:23 PM

[Jolly_Rancher:]

Another idea is being talked about with greater frequency, and I really like it. The government should pay $400,000 on all mortgages. It would cost about 7 trillion, but it would go to the right people (i.e.tax payers) and it would go to the heart of the problem bypassing the middleman banker.

Feb 11 05:48 PM

[EEB:]

There are many things in the stimulus bill that I don't like, but why should one think that massive tax cuts right now will stimulate the economy? Are they going to be short-term or long-term tax cuts? If short-term why will they have any lasting impact given that the tax rebate fromt the spring and summer of 2008 did not have any lasting effect. Businesses won't hire knowing that the short-term stimulus is going to end. Also, in this climate, how many businesses are going to hire even if the tax cuts are long-term?

Some obvious stuff like giving money to states so that they don't have to fire employees and cut spending seem like better ways to go right now than tax cuts. While everyone is quibbling about the stimulus bill, California is already starting to furlough and layoff teachers, government workers, etc. The state is halting a variety of construction projects. What percentage of total USA GDP is produced by California?

As for the idea of paying $400,000 on all mortgages, I hope that was a joke. First, we reward the bankers who encouraged people to buy way too much house. Then we reward the fools who bought way too much house. I'd rather see that money go to someone who just lost a job or, I'd like it to go to a state to keep a teacher in the classroom.

Feb 11 09:00 PM

[Jolly_Rancher:]

It was not a joke. First, money would go toward currently active mortgages, not past foreclosures. Second it would punish banks by replacing high yield mortgages with low yield treasury bonds and take away their lucrative mortgage serving business. Finally, the plan wouldn't cost as much as face value because the absence of mortgage interest deduction would propel income taxes much higher. Sound better?


On Feb 11 09:00 PM EEB wrote:

> There are many things in the stimulus bill that I don't like, but
> why should one think that massive tax cuts right now will stimulate
> the economy? Are they going to be short-term or long-term tax cuts?
> If short-term why will they have any lasting impact given that the
> tax rebate fromt the spring and summer of 2008 did not have any lasting
> effect. Businesses won't hire knowing that the short-term stimulus
> is going to end. Also, in this climate, how many businesses are
> going to hire even if the tax cuts are long-term?
>
> Some obvious stuff like giving money to states so that they don't
> have to fire employees and cut spending seem like better ways to
> go right now than tax cuts. While everyone is quibbling about the
> stimulus bill, California is already starting to furlough and layoff
> teachers, government workers, etc. The state is halting a variety
> of construction projects. What percentage of total USA GDP is produced
> by California?
>
> As for the idea of paying $400,000 on all mortgages, I hope that
> was a joke. First, we reward the bankers who encouraged people to
> buy way too much house. Then we reward the fools who bought way
> too much house. I'd rather see that money go to someone who just
> lost a job or, I'd like it to go to a state to keep a teacher in
> the classroom.

Feb 11 09:30 PM

[sunnsea:]

Clearly most posters here still have a job or are living off dividends. Obama, Schummer et al know what's going on in the real world and it is scary. We have been hit by a flock of birds called Reagonomics and de-regulation. They have to guide this airplane into the Hudson and do several things at the same time all correctly so there is not any loss of life.

Feb 12 09:50 AM

[kelm:]

I believe the reason for their hysteria is the rapidly growing number of unemployed and the coming of summer. So far people have not taken to the streets in this country during the current crisis. They have in mass numbers in Britain, France, Latvia, Lithuania, Russia and others.

At the start of the Great Depression there were marches and mass demonstrations. When Roosevelt came in he was able to convince people he was on their side and doing everything possible. The marches ceased. That is what Obama is trying to do. If that fails and we add another 2 million unemployed by summer look to the streets. mass disturbances strike the fear of God into politicians - especially those who know they are not competent.

Feb 12 11:42 AM

[PainfullyAware:]

The Government has a better understanding of scope.

The things they are doing is disconcerting. Prisons run by private companies - profit from prisoners; Troops with the mission of Riot Control in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act; The Federal Subjugation and Militarization of the police force. H.R. 45 (Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009) that was introduced this session if passed will be the first step to disarming America. In the Stimulus Bill about to be passed the government will take over the Health Care Industry - We all will become expendable due to budget.

They are preparing to "Keep The Lid On".

Feb 12 02:22 PM

[tkenyon:]

Yup - Read Jim Brown's (of Cleveland Browns fame) views in Esquire:

“A liberal is arrogant enough to think he can do you a half-***ed favor. He is superior enough to think he can give you something that you don’t deserve. A liberal will cut off your leg so he can hand you a crutch.”

Feb 12 02:39 PM

[Stone Fox C...:]

Why can't they vote line item by line item? This system is absurd when they throw all these items in together and vote on them together. It'd be so easy to eliminate the pork if Congress really wanted to do it.

Feb 13 12:50 PM