Tentative Stimulus Deal Confirms Krugman's Law
As I noted earlier, the Senate has apparently reached a $780 billion compromise stimulus package after supposed moderates amputated over $100 billion in funding for health care, education and other vital initiatives.
While many of my liberal allies disagree with my assessment that President Obama got rolled by bringing a knife to a gun fight with Congressional Republicans, it's hard to disagree with New York Times columnist Paul Krugman's January 5th prediction of what would come to pass. Call it Krugman's Law:
"Look, Republicans are not going to come on board. Make 40% of the package tax cuts, they'll demand 100%. Then they'll start the thing about how you can't cut taxes on people who don't pay taxes (with only income taxes counting, of course) and demand that the plan focus on the affluent. Then they'll demand cuts in corporate taxes. And Mitch McConnell is already saying that state and local governments should get loans, not aid - which would undermine that part of the plan, too."
And as I've previously suggested, there is also Krugman's Corollary. Fearful of a Democratic majority for years to come, Republicans are afraid not that Barack Obama's economic recovery package will fail, but that it might succeed. Or as Krugman himself put it on January 26th:
"Conservatives really, really don't want to see a second New Deal, and they certainly don't want to see government activism vindicated. So they are reaching for any stick they can find with which to beat proposals for increased government spending."
|
When Bush was still in charge I called them the National Bushist Workers Party, but the threat posed by these people turned out to be much exaggerated. They are not in charge anymore; we won; and now we have an obligation not only to act decently but also, as FDR warned us, not to panic.
But it's only the better commentators who have merely panicked and not spoken indecently. BuzzFlash gives verbal fistpumps when Obama says something harsh about Republicans--rather than being sad and regretful that we are in this situation, as a decent American would do. BradBlog goes completely over the top and suggests that the Democrats deny New Hampshire a seat in the Senate until Al Franken is seated--and BradBlog is supposedly a pro-voting rights blog. It's not just a counterproductive suggestion but obscene; and I'm especially offended by it, because I'm a Minnesotan.
After every election the change that comes reveals the world in new light, and in new light a lot of my left-wing comrades seem similar to neocons, just with less noxious choices of whom to target. But others just seem panicky, impatient, short-sighted, which is much better. These may overlap a lot with the Chicken Littles who thought having a lengthy primary campaign would throw the election to McCain.
Posted by Barry Schwartz on February 6, 2009 5:32 PMKrugman's law is a good name for what the GOP plans to do.
Obama ignores it as his peril.
Posted by Lindsey on March 1, 2009 5:17 PMWow! A year later, and boy, does Barry look amazingly prescient! Gosh, I'm glad that President Obama resisted the temptation to be all nasty and rude, and instead was gentlemanly and kind to the Republicans - they sure have responded as expected!
Posted by JohnR on January 21, 2010 11:19 AMGod help us.