[Marxism] The Nation: "More bipartisanship, less stimulus"

["Fred Feldman" <ffeldman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

The main effect of the changes accepted by triangulating Democrats in order
to win the votes of the last two "moderate" Republicans on earth, Susan
Collins of Maine and the now antediluvian Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania (I
remember him when he seemed a mere boy, but then I was a mere boy myself) is
to cut sharply, if not gut, those aspects of the "stimulus" that help
working people survive in the crisis.

Some rather important parts appear -- I am not sure, because the details are
covered up in the official debate presented to media listeners and readers
--- to have basically made the cut. This includes support to state
unemployment insurance programs and relaunching of Head Start for pre-school
working-class (and other) children and expansion of food stamps (which is in
the direct interest of ranching, agribusiness, meatpacking and supermarket
chains). I don't know what happened to money for school lunch programs. Many
other programs have been cut or eliminated.

The whole thing is obscured by the media's practice of treating the
"stimulus" as a scary lump sum. Not one news report I saw on TV or in a
major newspaper even mentioned anything specific that was being cut in their
news stories. I would like to know what made the cut and what didn't. But
the Republican ability -- fostered by Obama's claims that he can bring
together all opposed forces as "Americans" -- to wield the filibuster as a
threat may be having its biggest success since the blocking of anti-lynching
laws in what is now Way Back When. Of course, the Republicans could not do
this without the Democrats, just as the Dixiecrats could not strangle
civil-rights legislation without the northern liberals.

A whopping 42 percent of the "stimulus" now consists of tax cuts, weighted
toward businesses and the rich who supposedly, in this environment, will
unfailingly invest any money that happens to come their way in
"job-creating" areas, which of course they don't. After all, unemployment
compensation doesn't directly create jobs -- it isn't capital -- but only
allows the strata of workers who receive it to more or less live through the
crash

In my opinion, these issues should be viewed as the heart of working
people's interests -- and they have some stake -- in the stimulus debate.

It is notable that the basically right-liberal Washington Post has supported
the attack on the stimulus plan, arguing that stuff like Head Start and
unemployment compensation have nothing to do with "job creation," -- as
though "jobs" of workers and not "profits" of bosses is what the stimulus is
ultimately all about -- but should be dealt with separately or (ideally) not
at all. The New York Times has taken an editorial stand in the other camp.

We should have in mind that this is about more, from our point of view, than
whether the stimulus will resolve the economic crisis or contribute to
resolving it. I have my doubts. But there are real stakes for working people
in this debate.
Fred Feldman


http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/406028/more_bipartisanship_less_stimu
lus?rel=hpbox

More Bipartisanship, Less Stimulus posted by John Nichols on 02/07/2009 @
12:02am

Determined to pass something in the way of a stimulus package, Senate
Democrats on Friday bartered away key elements of the more robust plan
approved by the House. 

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, and his caucus colleagues got
what will be called a "bipartisan agreement." But this is not a case of less
being more. 

The Senate's $780 billion plan is still a budget buster. 

However, in order to get two Republican votes (those of Susan Collins of
Maine and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania) that were needed to break a
threatened GOP filibuster, Reid surrendered an estimated $110 billion is
proposed stimulus spending. In doing so, they cut not just fat but bone. The
plan is now more weighted than before toward tax cuts (which will account
for more than 40 percent of the overall cost of the package) that will do
little or nothing to stimulate job creation for a country than lost almost
600,000 positions in January alone. As French President Nicolas Sarkozy, no
liberal, said Friday of countries that opt for tax cuts rather than
stimulus: The approach "will bring them nothing" in the way of economic
renewal. 

The Senate's increased emphasis on tax cuts comes at the expense of the sort
of aggressive spending that might actually get a stalled economy moving. 

Spending for school construction that would actually have put people to work
-- while at the same time investing in the future -- has been slashed. 

Title I funding increases have been cut. 

Supplemental transportation funding has been hacked. 

Axed, as well, has been $90 million that was to have been allocated to plan
for and manage a potential flu pandemic that economists and public health
experts worry could shutter remaining businesses, bring the economy to a
complete standstill and throw the country into a deep depression. 

The bottom line is that, under the Senate plan: 

* States will get less aid. 

* Schools will get less help. 

* Job creation programs will be less well funded. 

* Preparations to combat potential public health disasters -- which could
put the final nail in the economy's coffin -- will not be made. 

In every sense, the Senate plan moves in the wrong direction. 

At a time when smart economists are saying that a bigger, bolder stimulus
plan is needed, Senate Democrats and a few moderate Republicans have agreed
to a smaller, weaker initiative. 

And Republicans are still delaying passage. It could be Sunday, even Monday,
before a vote is taken. And who knows what more will be lost -- in time and
stimulus spending before President Obama signs a bill. 

These are the fruits of bipartisan fantasies and the compromises that follow
upon them. President Obama, who should have been on television addressing
the nation and doing everything in his power to rally support for a
sufficient stimulus plan, will be lucky if he gets anything by the
President's Day deadline he set. (Even after the Senate measure passes, a
difficult process of reconciling the very different House and Senate bills
must take place. Then there will be more votes before any legislation gets
to the president's desk.) 

The White House still wants to advance this measure, as do Senate Democratic
leaders. And, considering the urgency of the moment, they are probably right
to try to do something. But if the final "stimulus package" proves to be
insufficient to jump start the economy -- and if what is left of public
confidence in the prospect of turnaround collapses as a result -- this
Friday night compromise will be remembered with pained regret



________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu