Monday, March 28, 2011

An Establishment Republican Explains why Boehner's Dink & Dunk Approach on the Budget is the Right One

I'm unsure about the current approach of passing continuing resolutions that get the budget to match what the Republicans want rather than forcing a showdown.  I also admit that the $61M the Republicans are cutting is nowhere near enough but is literally an order of magnitude larger than the ridiculous budget proposed by Obama and the Democrats.  But, I think that it's possibly the best that we can expect at this time, while Republicans control only the House and not the Senate or Presidency.  Regardless of what I think, here is what long-time, respected, establishment Republican Fred Barnes thinks.  I'm not going to make the argument, I'll let Fred:
...The end zone is far away, however, and impatience won't get Republicans there. Impatience is not a strategy. It may lead to a government shutdown with unknown results. To enact the sweeping cuts they desire, Republicans must hold the House and capture the Senate and White House in the 2012 election. Then they'll control Washington. Now they don't.

In the meantime, the incremental strategy is working. Republicans have passed two short-term measures to keep the government in operation since early March while slashing $10 billion in spending. At this rate, they would achieve the target of GOP congressional leaders of lopping off $61 billion from President Obama's proposed budget in the final seven months of the 2011 fiscal year.
Barnes was around in 1995 when Republicans forced a government shutdown to bring Clinton around on the budget. It backfired for Republicans at the ballot box in 1996. Would it backfire for Republicans now? I think the battlefield is much different now, and it may not backfire, but it's certainly prudent to consider that possibility.

His summary:
The House speaker has been accused of playing a weak hand. "I think John Boehner has basically climbed into the Bob Dole suit," columnist Mark Steyn told talk radio host Hugh Hewitt. "Arguing over itsy-bitsy, half a billion here and half a billion there . . . is preposterous."

But it may not be if it's the most you can get under current circumstances. What's unsatisfying to many conservatives is most likely the best Republicans can achieve in 2011. "Public opinion seems to support Republican efforts to cut spending without shutting down the government," notes Keith Hennessey, former domestic policy adviser to President George W. Bush, and some recent polls back him up. Mr. Hennessey supports a gradualist strategy. "Don't change tactics," he says. "Just ratchet up your demands a little."

That makes sense. What doesn't is sacrificing spending cuts you can get on the altar of those you can't.
Of course, Read the whole thing. Not sure if he's right or wrong.

1 comment:

  1. Fred Barns is one of those guys that are stuck in a bubble world called Washington D.C.. I like what he says most of the time on the panel on the Special Report at Fox News. This level of debt under these circumstances is unlike anything America has seen before, even after WWII.

    Barnes is looking at this issue from the narrow perspective or prism of politics. He is probably correct in stating that the Republicans are doing the best they can do under these conditions. But the fact is that these cuts are COMPLETELY meaningless from solving the debt crisis or reducing the debt as noted in several of my posts. It could be argued that these cuts are just a start and are a step in the right direction. If so then they are a good thing. I don't think that the Republicans can do any better at making the necessary reforms to entitlement programs even if they do take control of Congress and the White House in 2012 because of polling data that shows that the majority of people, to include the tea party, don't support making meaningful cuts to social security or other entitlements. Are people ready to live through another Great Depression that would result from the necessary cuts? Would you? Making the necessary economic reforms are not politically possible to do as these reforms would cause the lost of social cohesion. Social Security can not and will not be touched--impossible. Those that do will be politically crucified.

    This issue needs to be looked at from the larger more encompassing prism of culture and the larger situation that America and the world finds itself in--looking at the big picture. If the Republicans did insist on making the massive cuts now, this would most likely cause a government shut down. This would hurt America's ability to service its current debt or to issue any new debt which is the primary way the government is financing itself, 46 cents of every $. Plus the American people are not ready for such drastic cuts right now. A government shut down would affect negatively America at a time when it is fighting three wars and is near the edge. So I agree that Republicans are not insisting on making the necessary cuts now. These points shows how difficult it is to make the necessary reforms. An important factor in making the necessary reforms is how will people react? Some serious economic pain will result from these reforms. This means your life's goals and economic life will be put on hold or done away with.

    And the fact is that the government has expanded under every President to include Reagan and by a massive margin under the last President. But maybe things will change in 2012. Either way things goes, a Depression will occur in our lifetimes. How people react to this will determine the outcome.

    ReplyDelete