One thing many people aren’t factoring into this budget debate is the fact that it will be happening in a Presidential election season. The more established GOP candidates have begun to enter the race, and they will need to get votes from conservative backers. Therefore they will push the public conversation increasingly to the right. Witness Tim Pawlenty advocating for a government shutdown tomorrow:
(Pawlenty) then launched into a full-throated attack on the other big government spending story moving on Capitol Hill on Wednesday: the vote for the shutdown-averting 2011 budget deal forged by Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and, of course, the leaders of Pawlenty’s own party in the House last week.
“The more we learn about” that deal, Pawlenty said, “the worse it looks.”
With his attack on the plan, which he said was “forced” by Obama and Reid, Pawlenty joins the ranks of conservatives upset that the largest raw-dollar spending cut in American history didn’t go nearly far enough.
“When you consider that the federal deficit in February alone was over $222 billion, to have actual cuts less than the $38 billion originally advertised is just not serious,” Pawlenty said in his statement Wednesday. “The fact that billions of dollars advertised as cuts were not scheduled to be spent in any case makes this budget wholly unacceptable.”
I’ve done away with the canard that the budget deal was entirely smoke and mirrors. But here’s the comeuppance: that claim, paraded by those who want to believe that the President played a bad hand, is being used by GOP Presidential types to nullify the deal entirely.
I don’t think T-Paw will be successful this time around. But this sets the marker for the next fight. In fact, the whole kabuki about the GOP having “trouble” rounding up the votes for the budget deal is in service to playing another round of “bad cop, insane cop” and forcing major concessions in the next hostage event. John Boehner certainly believes that will be the debt limit, and he treated the Obama plan announced today like a first pass on THAT fight. The outside pressure from these GOP Presidential candidates who want to show off their crazy side will help serve that end as well.
So the political dynamic on the right is to move further and further right. The political dynamic on the left is to move further and further right, and give up on some very important priorities.
The United States now really needs the government to be spending an extra $3T on infrastructure over the next 12 years–other Pacific nations are planning to do so. Obama is giving up.
The United States now really needs–and Ben Bernanke recommends–an additional ARRA-sized fiscal stimulus over the next three years of $1T or so. Obama is giving that up.
The United States really needs failure to meet budget-balance targets to trigger high-bracket tax increases. Obama is giving that up.
The United States really needs to deal with the greater fiscal needs of an aging America by either (a) opening the borders, or (b) implementing a VAT. Obama is giving that up.
I list these not to necessarily agree with all of them, but to give you the scope of options that have been written out of this debate. Obama offered a defense of the welfare state today, and he supported mildly higher taxes on the rich, but those were two specks on a large field, with the rest of it not tended to. The fact that Third Way thinks Obama is leading on this fight, and that the deficit debate has moved from “if or when” to “how” tells you most of what you need to know.
Will there be any stop to this death march to the right?




64 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
The GINI is out of the bottle. Brazil, here we come.
Update to Allen’s comment:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality
But what does history tell us? That until the shit hits the fan, and no matter who can see what is going on and speaking about it( think “financial crisis”), nothing will stop “this death march to the right?”.
People seem much more inclined to be reactive than proactive. Why that is I don’t have an answer to.
We have government of, by and for plutocrats. Unless progressives find some creative, powerful way to forge a genuine left, we are doomed. I think O’s vision of our future includes a shrunken and weakened middle class, an expanded class of the working poor, the persistence of deep poverty in our cities and rural areas, an impovished class of elderly people trying to hang on in a workforce that doesn’t want them anymore, young people, many crippled by debt, struggling to get into a work place that has largely moved off into the developing world and a growing poplulation of sick and demoralized people who can’t access health care.
Otherwise, it’s pretty OK,
that’s been the story for over a year. how many progressives have been challenging the narrative that the Ds have better, more grown up, ways of reducing the deficit than the bat-shit-crazy Rs?
and how many progressives have been challenging the entire premise of deficit reduction? how many headline progressives have been explaining the real macroeconomics instead of premising arguments based on neoliberal assumptions?
OF COURSE THIS HAS THE EFFECT OF MOVING THE DYNAMIC TO THE RIGHT!!!
(dear mods, sorry about the yelling. sometimes the frustration gets the better of me. today has been one of those days.)
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I never heard President Obama rule out stimulus. Will the GOP grant it? Maybe only under certain conditions, but unlikely. The president basically needs to back-track from the more fiscally conservative decisions he’s gone along with up to this point in order advocate the change we all want to see. This will make him look like a hypocrite, but who will complain about getting housing, employment, and education assistance? Not those receiving it. If the Democrats take back the House (quite a feat at this point), maybe we can get more aid. In the meantime, we have the House of Crazies and the Senate of Do-Nothings to contend with. Holding a stalling pattern on social welfare cuts by saying “this will not happen while I am president” may leave President Obama looking good by comparison, even if it’s not what we truly need. That comes later. Reality will take a back-seat to politics.
“budget-balance targets” are neoliberal nonsense.
the point of high marginal taxes is to tax rent (taxing capital gains at rates lower than income is nuts) not to generate revenue.
what fiscal needs?
we have real needs for goods and services that come from a productive economy. we don’t have fiscal needs.
Sort of O/T, but still on the subject of the “right”…happened to be up earlier than usual this morning, turned on the TV and went by MSNBC just in time to see Morning Joe’s trio of pundits: Harold Ford, Mike Barnicle, and Mark Halperin.
What a collection of pukes.
Depends on what the meaning of “this” is. We’ve heard this BS before. I don’t trust this guy. Remember, while he was supporting a PO in public, he was trading it away behind closed doors.
Anyone who doesn’t think he’ll do it again — with SS and Medicare — should bend over and grab their ankles.
I’m very pessimistic about what is happening – Glen Greenwald has a colum on his blog at:
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/04/13/obama/index.html
and I think he pretty much nails it – its clear that all this stuff abot the Big O being a bad negotiator is nonsense. The O is getting pretty much what he wants and what he wants is to sell out the poor and the old to reassure the indies, the oligarchs and sane Republicans that he is a reasonable guy they can trust. He just expects us to do as we have always done – fall in line and vote for him because we fear the Republicans.
He may have a surprise coming -
“Will there be any stop to this death march to the right?”
Well, if we keep supporting Obama no matter what he does, eventually he will be so filled with gratitude that he does what we want!
[end sarcasm]
My no vote will be one surprise he’ll have coming. Not that he gives a big rat’s ass.
My anbswer to the question posed in the last sentence:
Answer = I can’t see anything on the horizon. Not enough people will ever get elected to stop it. The peole with the mnoney to get people elected don’t want it all to stop. Only thing I could think of is hitting bottom. Depression-like. What’s scary is that we headed thagt direction and things haven’t changed. Now we’re dealing with this “fiscal responsibility” bullshit. So yeah. The race to the bottom won’t stop.
My response assumes voting isn’t currupted too, so if you believe it is, then read no further.
But, assuming voting is still “real,”, then a partial answer to your question is yes, there CAN be a stop to this. Sorry I can’t answer as to whether there WILL be. If I had to bet right now, I’m afraid I’d have to bet no.
But the day those that claim to be liberals and progressives STOP providing the base for which the Democratic Party can continue this two party dance to the right will be the day it stops. But, as long as such a significant portion of “liberals” and “progressives” are willing to enable the Democratic Party to continue the dance by rewarding them with their votes no matter what, well then that day will never come.
Like I said, if I had to bet, I’d bet it won’t stop. There is no one here that can credibly argue that the evidence that the Democratic Party is right on board with this move right is as plain for all to see as it likely can be.
And with all of that evidence, with all of the same excuses and outcomes repeating, STILL a MAJORITY of those that claim to be “liberals” or “progressives” either don’t believe the evidence, or wrongly conclude that even with the evidence the Democrats must be supported because they’re not quite as far right as the Republicans. (Which, btw, will ALWAYS be true.)
The D party moving right enables the R party to move further right, which enables the D party to move further right, which enables the R party…. well, you get it. Or maybe not. Apparently a majority of usually well meaning folks don’t get it.
I don’t get why VAT is a good idea. My dad loved the idea. Never got it.
If the president that we voted for would actually show up and make arguments like he did today for days and days and days, and refrain from prepitulating, and make the R’s own their craziness, there is still a tiny chance that the Tea Party will calve and float away.
They have to calve sometime, right? I’ve been wrong for months on this but I can’t believe how utterly stupid the right has become. They have no serious public support and someday that has to matter.
Have you noticed that in the wake of today’s speech Obama has been forgiven by liberals/progressives? It’s as if the two year nightmare is over, and he’s finally come to his senses.
My guess is around the end of July we’ll see that he never intended to break the stride of his reign of terror on ordinary people.
But in the meantime, people want desperately to believe . . .
we’re not well meaning here. we’re just right. right?
eventually reality wins,
Obama and the GOP can run from the 800,000 pound Gorilla call the ECONOMY all they want to, but the GORILLA will always win.
If all of this crazy talk about Deficits does not result in good JOBS,
Social unrest in the USA is going to sky rocket, it is already on the rise
$5.00 per gallon gas is going to end this fake death march OBama and the GOP is on, and put the USA on a real death march that intelligent people will be needed to stop
it the Economy Stupid!
Obama poll numbers are dropping rapidly
Pennsylvania voters sour on Obama ahead of 2012
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102×4813102
the elites are going to have work over time to keep OBAMA from falling off the cliff
the more OBAMA goes right, the less popular he becomes,
do you want to know why?
it is real simple, conservatives will not vote for OBAMA, because he is black. sad but true
If we’ll have to eventually assume the position anyway, I’d at least like a little hope before having to vote against the President in 2012.
not
Obama poll numbers are dropping
the Dem party is being hijack by the Wisconsin SAGA as we speak, and OBAMA knows it
Pennsylvania voters sour on Obama ahead of 2012
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102×4813102
why is Penn voters dumping OBAMA? can U say Union country
most hard core progressives dump OBAMA months ago
I’ve read through Obama’s speech today 2x now. And I have probably a somewhat weird reaction to it but here it is:
Did anyone ever read Asimov’s Foundation Trilogy? I can’t lay my hands on my copy immediately, but I distinctly remember one piece. Where an Ambassador came to the colony and spent several days talking and listening.
The upshot was that regardless of what the colonists thought, the Ambassador had made exactly zero representations and any statement he actually made was semantically null.
I can’t point to one piece of the speech which is entirely semantically full, unequivocal, as regards policy.
Combined with the framing that “cuts are necessary” there is nothing Obama won’t do that indeed advances the “death march to the right.”
happens all the time with him. i like to theink the number of foriving types gets fewer and fewer
Nope. Not until our “liberal” information gatekeepers (like you) abandon talking about the corporatist duopoly and begin explaining to their readers that we do not live in a functioning democracy – that we actually live under an inverted totalitarian and managed democracy political system and that the only way to change that system is to begin to organize for the expressed purpose of changing it via effective, sustained, peaceful direct action and civil disobedience.
I don’t follow. If I insulted folks here, that wasn’t my intention. When I said a majority of well meaning don’t get it, that also means a minority of well meaning folks do get it.
I think a lot of the folks here are in the latter.
Sorry if my post above (or this one) insults anyone.
Fair enough.
We now have 30 years of historical economic data to show what happens when we follow neo-liberal and neo-conservative corporate first economic policies. The results are especially bad for those in the middle, working, and poor classes. So, for President Obama and the other Republican presidential candidates who continue promoting deregulation, austerity measures for the middle and poor classes, tax cuts, and spending cuts…they are ALL dangerous for this country as a whole. This continued move to the right will eventually catch up with even the wealthy.
Economist Joseph Stigletz stated it best, “Alexis de Tocqueville once described what he saw as a chief part of the peculiar genius of American society—something he called “self-interest properly understood.” The last two words were the key. Everyone possesses self-interest in a narrow sense: I want what’s good for me right now! Self-interest “properly understood” is different. It means appreciating that paying attention to everyone else’s self-interest—in other words, the common welfare—is in fact a precondition for one’s own ultimate well-being. Tocqueville was not suggesting that there was anything noble or idealistic about this outlook—in fact, he was suggesting the opposite. It was a mark of American pragmatism. Those canny Americans understood a basic fact: looking out for the other guy isn’t just good for the soul—it’s good for business. The top 1 percent have the best houses, the best educations, the best doctors, and the best lifestyles, but there is one thing that money doesn’t seem to have bought: an understanding that their fate is bound up with how the other 99 percent live. Throughout history, this is something that the top 1 percent eventually do learn. Too late.”
I am amazed that anyone that isn’t to the right of Attila the Hun is giving Obama praise for a speech. Yet another speech from the great speechifier.
Remember, this is the man that told a joint session of Congress that he wanted a “public option” in his health care – long after he had assured the mega corporate parasites of the American health industry that he would never allow the public option.
I could mention his call for ending the Bush tax cuts just before his election contest – nahgonnahappen, but what’s the point? Obama has had more than two years to demonstrate that he’s something other than a conservative Republican.
He hasn’t and another speech is just another example of hope-a-dope.
It’s long past time to stop being a dope for a douche.
And then bargaining for and willingly supporting their passage — but now saying never again.
TOTAL fraud.
“Will there be any stop to this death march to the right?”
Remember the old saying “we had to burn the village in order to save it”?
Maybe the death march to the right and eventual collapse applies here. I sure as hell don’t have any other answers; this doesn’t work anymore.
I agree that it will be about the economy. Since the President continues down the same neo-liberal/neo-conservative path that has brought us to this point, I don’t see any way in which the economy will have markedly improved (except for possibly the wealthiest 1%)in the next year and a half. The Congressional Democrats also continue to believe in these failed economic policies so there won’t be any help from them either.
Obama just has no credibility with the left after his political version of 3 card monty but then he doesn’t care about the left and is merely trying to court “Independents”, the “know nothings” of the electorate.
you and me both bfl
The ratchet effect
Good one!
Just to be clear, you do realize that your #6 and #7 are responses to the embedded text of Brad DeLong’s, not anything DDay or FDL is espousing.
no. i’m sorry. trying to be a wise guy. posted it and saw it didn’t look the way i meant it. happens sometimes. sorry ofg and anyone else
A simplistic but very effective explanation. If only we had “enlightened” citizens regarding the ratchet effect. Thanks for that link.
Perfect description of Obama’s speeches.
Thom Hartmann mentions an interview of a wealthy German industrialist by an American journalist he once heard. The American journalist kept pressing him on the high taxes he paid in Germany. Finally the German said he wouldn’t want to pay lower taxes if it meant he had to live in an impoverished nation.
The only thing that will move the needle further to the left is the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, to get us back to a sane fiscal footing. The deficit IS alarming – it should be alarming to those on the left as well as the right. The question is – do we cut to achieve balance or do we set taxes at a proper level. Restoring the taxes of the 90s (not the 70s!) is the “left” position, and I’m glad Obama espoused it.
yes. but not anything dday is disagreeing with either (or explaining why delong is wrong).
brad delong may be a very nice guy, and he is certainly a D partisan (which i agree is far better than R), but he is not a progressive economist. he has been the epitome of the neoliberal economist, D version, for many many years.
there are signs he is reconsidering that position, and if he really does i will applaud his intellectual honesty.
but i have NO IDEA why he would be quoted on a progressive blog as defining the scope of the debate. give delong that position and progressive economists are defined right off the table.
… and since no one had yet challenged his quoted statement, i thought i’d at least give that a try.
You’re missing the point of the post. DDay is saying “look, delong has capitulated.”
That’s evinced by DDay saying “The political dynamic on the left is to move further and further right, and give up on some very important priorities” immediately prior to embedding Delong.
You have to take some yes-es sometimes. DDay is agreeing with you. The fact that he doesn’t make the top-to-bottom argument each time this comes up is not as important as the actual post that he wrote.
I think David was just using the DeLong reference as an example of all the stuff that Obama’s bargaining has, in effect, silently taken off the table — regardless whether they are desirable or not.
i’m sorry, i don’t read it that way (read it again trying to though).
delong is not the left. delong’s priorities are not the same as the important progressive priorities (at least i hope not!). and i don’t think that delong’s statement has anything to do with “the scope of options that have been written out of this debate” when the economists i read most, and the policies they advocate, have yet to be included in the debate.
Yes, it’s depressingly depressing.
Still waiting for him to put on his comfy shoes and march with the unions.
And how bout the P.O. he wanted so badly but just couldn’t get it done.
Keeping the Bush tax cuts three months ago was OK to tack onto the debt, but NPR and heating oil subsidies for the poor really went too far.
Sheesh. The “liberals” who got all squishy in their pants over Obama’s speech today is revolting. In case they forgot, he’s campaigning now.
I expect to hear many more months of the traditional Democratic rhetoric spewing forth from the liar in chief. Just like he did to get elected, he’s just saying shit he has no intention of honoring once he gets what he wants. Then, he’ll shit on their heads and turn all Hoover again.
If your yardstick is always going to be that you can never agree with a post that broadly agrees with you, yet doesn’t include your preferred economists, then I can see your point.
You will notice, however, that the broad point advocated in this post, is also overlooked in the debates. And that’s DDay’s lament.
We’re all crying over the spilt milk; whether it’s skim or whole milk is not exactly relevant.
Dean Baker: Statement on the President’s Deficit Reduction Plan LINK.
You didn’t insult anybody. That’s just not your style.
Thank you. I was attempting to find the words when I saw your post.
Thanks. Great statement.
I’ve got a great idea! I call it the Ultimate Republican SUPER Plan!
Here’s how it works. You don’t tax income over $250,000. Next, for every dollar earned over $300,000, you get to subtract $1 of taxable income. So, once you have $550,000 in income, you effectively have zero income as far as the IRS is concerned.
The point is to provide incentives to increase productivity. In order to lessen their tax burdens, people will work their asses off to get rich or die trying.
It’s tough love. I will win the Republican nomination for president. :)
The “death march to the right” occurred long before Obama got to Washington.
When Democrats compromised with Republicans instead of obstructing and blocking and delaying and generally rejecting the republican principles of the Constitution from 1995 through 2004, they set the nation on “the death march to the right.”
The big points of moving toward death were at a minimum,
- allowing the capital gain tax cut in 1997,
- not shutting down government in December 2000 by blocking the budget reconciliation bill that deregulated derivatives
- allowing the 2001 tax cuts instead of shutting down government
- allowing the 2003 tax cuts instead of shutting down government
- allowing the drug benefit to pass
- allowing the war in 2001
- allowing the war in 2002
- allowing the emergency funding for either war, instead of shutting down government
- failing to shutdown government in 2002 on increasing the debt limit
- failing to shutdown government in 2003 on increasing the debt limit
- failing to shutdown government in 2004 on increasing the debt limit
Any trip Obama made to Washington before 2004 was as a tourist, and by the time he took his seat in the Senate in 2005, the nation was on a death march to the right, and more important, marching to certain doom.
Democrats shutting down government and freezing the laws at 1997 to 1999 would have kept the US on a sound budget for years at the cost of accomplishing nothing for years, if not a decade. I’m sure Republicans would have gained a lot of power, Bush winning handily, Republicans winning 55 or more Senate seats, and Democrats being very much targeted and struggling to hang on.
Another turning point that set the nation on a death march to the right was Clinton deciding to balance the budget instead of taking the cue from the 90s Tea Party that talk of debt and deficits was really code for irresponsible deficit increasing tax cuts. If Clinton had cut taxes to buy increased spending spending and left office with huge deficits, the Bush era tax cuts could never have occurred.
Until voters vote against any candidate who will not promise tax hikes, we are on a death march to the right.
It was clear a decade ago, but you weren’t attacking the Democrats for failing to shutdown the government to prevent any Republican success after 1995, well before Obama arrived in Congress. By 2005, President Obama was screwed and forced to compromise because liberals weren’t able to give him a minimum of a two-thirds Democratic Congress so Democratic policies could be passed unilaterally. Obama had to compromise when the Senate wasn’t able to pass a single bill without compromising with Republicans in January 2009.
that’s not my yardstick.
i don’t think i “broadly agree” with the post.
and it’s not about my “preferred” economists. it’s about the difference between mainstream neoliberal economists (like delong) and progressives economists (like galbraith).
i’m not saying you shouldn’t agree with the post, or that you should think my issues are relevant to you.
but please don’t tell me i agree with something when i don’t. and please don’t tell me what my issues are or whether i should think they are relevant.
it’s not like i haven’t been reading the deficit related posts all day… or most of all year.
The 14th Amendment to the Constitution stops any law or administrative action that prevents the US from honoring a “public debt” commitment:
“Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.”
The Treasury Sec says the Debt limit will, at some point, prevent us from obeying the 14th Amendment, with legally required payments (non-bond of course) being affected beginning in July, and bond payments affected only much later.
Why not just say the debt limit law is unconstitutional and move on?
Toil as you will. Ignore allies as you will.
You have allies, such as myself. The message elements “deficits good now”
are lost on regular readers when too much detail invoked. Just my opinion.
Keep up your work. It’s needed.
This entire drama is fueled by Wall Street and their debt shifting bailouts.
Team Obama decided to cover up and fund massive financial fraud. All that fraudulent private debt is being pushed onto the publics backs.
That’s not to say that we have a debt/deficit problem which could somehow be solved by spending cuts. There’s absolutely no sane reason to cut spending.
The right keeps winning because the left isn’t effectivly countering them. There are as I see 4 problems.
1. The left keeps voting for moderate democrats because they’re total there is no other option. I don’t mean voting for pryor in arkansas where his opponent might actually be a nazi, I mean lieberman and feinstein where a liberal could win a primary and a general election.
2. The left has been badly let down by it’s leaders. I live in russ feingolds wisconsin and grew up in lane evans district in illinois. Both were good progressives, both were also egomaniacs who saw there elections as a personal crusade instead of an ideological one. Both did nothing to help progressives win primaries because both enjoy the attention of fawning progressives with no where else to turn.
3. Progressives won’t call out moderates who then misrepresent the true democratic position. When anthony weiner is on meet the press with harold ford who is introduced as a democrat, but who then repeatedly calls for tax cuts, why doesn’t weiner say “I want to let the viewers know, this man is no democrat.” They all say nothing, though.
4. Progressives are too wordy and honest. Republicans give a speech saying “we’ll cut taxes and everything will be fine” end of speech. Progressives spend 45 minutes explaining themselves. We just need to say ” we’ll give everyone health care and it will fix all our problems.” It is simple and more or less true. I am not the person to deal with the wordiness, but I can lie like hell.
Ooops, Meant to post this here (rather than next door).
Senate panel concludes Goldman Sachs profited from financial crisis
A two-year investigation says the investment bank deceived investors and Congress about its bets against the subprime mortgage market.
LINK.
Speaking of where to make tax cuts, my mind wanders over the spectrum, how about cutting the military, but that would put us at the mercy of private security men, (women? I think not) and who knows what THEY would do to prisoners.
As a US citizen watching the USA from outside the country, and recalling some little novel from 50 years ago about the USA breaking up into 5 regions after a civil war, knowing that my social security, my only income, is in jeapardy, knowing that Obama, good man though he is basically, but has a family to protect, could not possibly do what he might really want to do…
I guess I would make tax cuts in favor of the 4th estate, independent journalism and let the ………….fall where it may.
I’ve read that because the corporations, banks etc. operate globally, the wealthy in this country are no longer tied to the 99% in the US.
(response to speakingupnow @ 5:17)
dear mulp,
could you please give us an explanation for the relationship between inflation and defecit spending?
thank you
We will keep moving to the right simply because there is no left. The importance of organized labor cannot be over-stated. What’s the percentage of Americans who currently belong to a union, something like 7-8%?
And from my anecdotal experience, talking about class, solidarity or collective solutions out there in the real world will just get you labeled as a nut. Class is such a taboo in our culture, we’re all just one big aspirational middle class, right?
Big words such as inequality and justice are so 20th century. Heck, just to suggest that morality and politics are intrinsically linked is enough to get you banned from some so-called “progressive” blogs. Onwards to the technocratic future!