I’d expect several trial balloons about what the President will discuss in the State of the Union, and we already have one informed by his recent speeches: “competitiveness.” I agree with both Krugman and Robert Reich on this; if competitiveness is used as a frame to call for new investments, particularly in infrastructure and education, while fending off right-wing austerity, then great. If it’s a way to suggest that manufacturing companies should cut payrolls, or America should pass a bunch of corporate-written free trade agreements, or that we should do whatever’s on the mind of the Jeffrey Immelts of the world, then, well, not so great.
But look! The Wall Street Journal is out with one of the first trial balloons on the State of the Union address, and in fact, it claims the President will use the speech to call for new investments, particularly in infrastructure and education.
President Barack Obama will call for new government spending on infrastructure, education and research in his State of the Union address Tuesday, sharpening his response to Republicans in Congress who are demanding deep budget cuts, people familiar with the speech said.
Mr. Obama will argue that the U.S., even while trying to reduce its budget deficit, must make targeted investments to foster job growth and boost U.S. competitiveness in the world economy. The new spending could include initiatives aimed at building the renewable-energy sector—which received billions of dollars in stimulus funding—and rebuilding roads to improve transportation, people familiar with the matter said. Money to restructure the No Child Left Behind law’s testing mandates and institute more competitive grants also could be included.
While proposing new spending, Mr. Obama also will lay out significant budget cuts elsewhere, people familiar with the plans say, though they will likely fall short of what Republican lawmakers have requested.
Reading on, the budget cuts would be “targeted” and focused on “duplicative or dysfunctional federal programs.” Social Security is not mentioned at all in the story.
Let’s just say this is a far, far better opening bid than I expected. Instead of using competitiveness in the worst sense of the term, it uses it in the best; saying that in order to keep our economic footing as a nation we have to invest in what can build on our success. This isn’t designed to make Republicans happy, to be sure. It’s not offensive to corporations, necessarily – they like supplying the government for infrastructure, and having their R&D subsidized. But it’s most certainly not as pre-compromised as some other Obama-era initiatives. It offers a chance to reclaim “competitiveness” and frame it as investment, which is an offshoot of reclaiming patriotism as pride in American work and American production.
In addition to this, one of Obama’s top lieutenants in the Senate, Dick Durbin, who himself voted for the cat food commission report, gave a speech yesterday saying basically that any spending cuts should wait until the economy recovers fully. So now we see a left flank emerging – no spending cuts for now – to counteract the right flank of trillions in cuts, including $125 billion in this fiscal year.
The options were to get ready for a fight or to try and prove deficit-cutting bona fides. We’ve seen some of the latter from the President recently – the discretionary spending freeze, the pay freeze for government workers. The State of the Union is setting up as more like the former, at least in this rendering.
…I should add that the weekly address this week uses the “competitiveness” frame to talk about opening up new markets around the world, which is a not-too-subtle code for corporate-written free trade agreements.




32 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
from Social Security Works:
Shocker: Obama’s Less Trusted Than Bush On Social Security
LINK.
Thats nice, Hope for the best. But expect the worst.
That other shoe? When’s it gonna drop? I’m pretty sure the Preznint has two feet and (accordingly) would require two shoes. Just sayin’…
I agree with Solerso. Hope for the best, but expect the worst.
Dear Mr. President: Please surprise us. It would be nice to have some hope of real change to hang our hats on. (And none of that Lucy-with-the-football shit, either.)
Count me among the skeptical. Obama’s words rarely match his actions. It was just yesterday that his FCC approved the Comcast / NBC merger, and he also appointed General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt to head his “Jobs and Competitiveness” panel. This is just the same-old, same-old corporate stuff we got from Clinton and Bush. Whatever happened to the “Fierce Urgency of Now?”
Durbin double crossed Americans by voting for the Deficit Commission recommendations after saying that he did not think raising the retirement age was a good idea on one of those faux newsy-opinion shows. He also touted along with Gillibrand, the public option as an essential part of the HCR bill, until he had collected enough email addresses for fund-raising, and until the public option did not matter to either of them again. I wouldn’t trust him to bring in my mail.
Obama needs numbers in his speech X amount of dollars equals X amount of jobs. Obama needs to say we can pay for it by using the savings from ending both wars now or what ever the time table is for us to leave.
But he needs X to be a big enough number to impress the America People, Economists, and the Left.
He needs specific numbers for each state on how many and what kind of jobs will be created.
He needs the GOP to be left arguing against jobs for their home states.
He needs to call for a tax on the upper 10% who own most of America. He needs to give numbers on how much of America they own and how much the Rich They not US got richer with Bush’s tax breaks.
Then he needs to say the Bank Bailout primarily helped the rich and he needs numbers for that.
Then he needs an Asset tax but I will settle for an income tax like FDR had.
Obama needs to link himself and his plan to FDR he needs to say we tried republican economics for the 8 Bush years and we lost jobs while the rich got Richer. Tax cuts create jobs in other countries not America just look at WallStreet huge profits but from their overseas investments not from their investments that create jobs in America.
When Private Industry fails Government must step in.
“Competitiveness” can also mean gutting public education in favor of for-profit (and discriminating) charter schools.
If Obama wants to work with Republicans some more that means all his ideas about spending money to create jobs are just talk and we can go back to ignoring him.
A man with power who doesn’t use is like a priest and a man who needs viagra but doesn’t have any both might talk about sex but its just talk.
Call us Obama when its more than just talk.
Competitiveness, to these folks, means our workforce competes with the third world’s. Also too, union busting.
Every time I see an article about a speech by Obama, I always think the headline should be: “Obama makes a pleasant speech, no follow through expected”
Yes huge tax breaks but actually lower performance.
Agreed All big talk no action:)
Hmm, Politico has a take that gives the speech a decidedly different feel. Probably what the WSJ covers is the thing meant to give progressives some hope.
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2011/01/sotu-frame.html
We’ll see if he gives $800 billion to schools.
Yeah, bullshit. It’s been a fact through all of this “investment” that unless you’re a big corporation that can invest in full time personnel to lobby and track every single department on Capitol Hill 24/7, you have the option to apply for research money exactly once a year.
That ain’t a government that believes in having the country do research, it’s a government that gives research money to the same mouths at the same trough every time. SSDD.
Ho-hum. What Obama says and what Obama does are usually 180 degrees away from the other. Hence, if Obama is saying to invest in research, education and infrastructure, it most likely means that those three programs will be further *gutted* by Obama.
As Joe Wilson shouted out: YOU LIE!!!
I don’t believe a word he says. I’ll believe what I see happening with my own eyes. Obama hasn’t done one d*mn thing for Main Street since being elected. Obama works for the Oligarchs & the MIC, not for “small people.”
Yep, that’s what the ‘competitiveness’ frame has meant in education. I’m still waiting to hear the first syllable of the explanation for why public schools in affluent suburbs, taught by public school teachers who belong to public school teachers unions, can successfully prepare their privileged charges for Harvard, Northwestern & Stanford, while public school teachers and their unions are the source of all evil in schools that serve low income kids.
Even one syllable. From Arne or Barack or anybody.
I fully expect Obama to continue to support the failed Wall St banks and the failed corporations that were bailed out by the taxpayer. Immelt ran GE into the ground and the company would be gone except that We the People bailed them out. Why we should pick the failed CEO of a failed company to provide economic advice is beyond me.
The letters to my Senators, Congressman and President will go out later today – support Social Security or I’m done with the Democratic party.
I just do not beleve anything Obama says anymore.
(especialy when he hasn’t said it yet.)
Failure is Success, War is Peace, Poverty is Prosperity it’s all straight issue Orwellian New-speak, lightly toasted and presented to us almost raw. The seething contempt of the elites bleeds through it all like a car alarm going off in the background. Watch what he does, ignore his speeches except to see them for the diversion they are.
Lucy, football, comes to mind.
Another litany of sell-tested slogans crafted to deceive.
and
means another $9 billion to Excelon (nukes), one of O’s largest campaign contributors.
Also, rawstory has a headline that O will ‘unlock’ America’s productivity, which is code for firing workers (offshoring, labor unfavorable trade deals, all of the same old crap).
NCLB testing changes code for destroying teachers’ unions.
If any of this gets done at all.
Don’t y’all know O well enough by now to figure out what the real agenda is.
Let’s hope so.
Krugman and a few other economists have long said that the stimulus was too timid, and ended too early once deficit hawk became a fad. The Wall Street bailout saved the bankers, but resulted in 0 jobs in the US (maybe more robo-signers?). The same “too big to fail” are now foreclosing (fraudulently) at a record rate (screw you middle-class taxpayer!).
Something must be done to get more money in circulation to the little people. Public works pulled us out of the Great Depression.
I personally know of quite a few who are employed only because of the first stimulus act. More thoughtful spending, please.
Look at the two wars to see where to find the money.
Yaaaay!!! More clean coal for everyone!!!
Yaaaay!!!!
Something tells me GE has got their eye on that $800b.
Naturally, our new jobs czar will promptly send it all to “CHINA, CHINA, CHINA, CHINA, CHINA.”
He is a nut on China, after all.
Not sure I understand all the reading of tealeaves about the SOTU speech.
Historically, presidents have said all sorts of things during their speeches, most of which is forgotten in a week, and usually not even pushed by the presidents in their actual policy proposals in Congress.
I guess there is too much going on, and this hasn’t been noticed, but Obama wants to allow low wage Mexican truckers to transport goods in the USA.
cause he has to comply with Nafta.
jan 11th 2011.
http://www.joc.com/government-regulation/dot-releases-concept-document-us-mexican-trucking
maybe another effect of this would be to avoid unionized longshoreman operated ports in the USA. so those jobs will go as well.
Book Salon up with Mark Hertsgaard’s Hot: Living Through the Next Fifty Years on Earth hosted by Bill McKibben
Oh right:
uses the “competitiveness” frame = free trade agreements = pay cuts
Oh, the GOP have a budget that frees up a lot of money -
Like the repeal of Davis-Bacon – that pesky law that requires the Federal government contractor to pay the prevailing wage – rather than trying to get the cheapest workers.
Repeal the GOP tell us will say over a trillion – why we will get work done by illegal immigrants at less that half the wages paid now.
So we can use that trillion to hire the American’s out of work because the Feds hired those money saving lower wage folks.
It all makes since to me and I am sure Obama wants to sell it to us. s
If Obama is going to invest We the People’s tax dollars in directly developing new medicines, what rewards are we going to get as a result? More effective, cheaper meds? Uh-huh.
Federal Research Center Will Help Develop Medicines LINK.
Competitiveness…
Reminds me of Al Gore’s 1993 NAFTA debate with Ross Perot. Gore said that with NAFTA we’d knock the socks off the workers.
Gore never did explain the advantages of sockless workers.
Yup. That’s pretty much how Tom Friedman explained it on NPR.
Of course, Friedman never explains why such a process wouldn’t be exported to China and India. Nor does he explain why US super workers would be paid a single penny more than they already are.