LIVING POLITICS
Howard Fineman
Demur, Dodge, Punt
It seems un-American, and politically suicidal, to suggest some belt-tightening—let alone new taxes.
You can't blame Tom Brokaw for trying. In the second presidential debate, he asked Barack Obama and John McCain an obvious question with an all-too-obvious answer: will the economy get worse before it gets better? "No," said Obama, before launching into a paean to American can-do optimism. "Depends on what we do," said McCain, who then launched into an attack on his foe. But everyone knew the real answer.
Our sinking economy would get worse. And it did. After Tuesday, the Dow fell another 10.5 percent, the Big Three Detroit automakers were near bankruptcy and the world's finance ministers were jetting to Washington in hopes of a deal to rescue the planet.
Truth, they say, is the first casualty of war. But it hasn't even made it onto the battlefield of economics in this presidential election. Asked about how the global meltdown will change their priorities, the candidates demur; asked how they will call on the American people to sacrifice, they dodge. Asked to tell us how they see the world in 2009, they punt. "It's frustrating and dangerous, because neither candidate is building the credibility that comes from candor," says Maya MacGuineas, who heads the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
It seems un-American, and politically suicidal, to suggest some belt-tightening—let alone new taxes. In 1984, Walter Mondale declared that he or President Reagan would have to raise taxes, regardless of who won. The earnest Minnesotan lost 49 states. In 1988, George H.W. Bush was determined not to repeat Mondale's mistake. So he declared at the Republican convention: "Read my lips—no new taxes!" His own economic adviser had tried to strike the line, but Bush's political aides kept it in. Bush won 40 states—and raised taxes two years later. The last to talk grimly about the trouble ahead was Ross Perot in 1992.
The economic crisis is so vast that the candidates can be excused if they don't know what to say. They claim that they have answers, but not comprehensive ones; they talk about crisis without daring to describe its nightmarish permutations. The most specific or sweeping proposals can be rendered irrelevant by one day's dramatic events; the planetary numbers are so huge that the candidates can seem as though they're doodling with crayons on the margin of a wall-size oil painting. "Up to a point, you have to give these guys a pass, I guess," says MacGuineas. "Things are moving too fast for them to keep up."
As a result, the debates on and off the air can seem divorced from reality. To take them seriously requires voters to exercise what Samuel Taylor Coleridge called a "willing suspension of disbelief." The 19th-century poet was talking about the attitude of mind you need to appreciate a poem, but that attitude may be precisely what voters need in the last weeks of the campaign. They need to assume that the country and the world can dig out of this mess—and that a new president can make the difference in doing so. Is there a candidate equipped to do this? It will need to be someone willing—and, most important, able—to explain unpleasant truths, to admit that he doesn't know all the answers and yet not forget the sense of hope Americans hold dear as a secular faith. With three weeks left, time to find him is running out.
© 2008
Loading Menu
Member Comments
Posted By: Nins @ 10/30/2008 2:53:59 PM
Comment: Honestly, looking at McCain and Obama objectively (without any party affiliation or any racism) I really can't see why anybody would vote for McCain. Obama has offered a much more coherent plan to get America out of the economic disaster we are in.
Right now, most people are anxious about the economy, fearing the worst but hoping for the best.
Reality check: within 18 months YOU could be standing in a bread line. That's how bad it really is. And Obama will work actively to prevent this short term, as well as make us strong again long term. As much as I like McCain and admire his patriotism, he really is not up for the job, not now with the global markets falling apart.
Obama's economic plan can be found at:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/index.php
Posted By: Nins @ 10/30/2008 2:53:39 PM
Comment: Taxation is and always has been a redistribution of wealth. Once you recognize that point, the question is, how are we going to spend the money we raise in taxes?
For the past 8 years, our tax dollars have gone to killing civilians in Iraq and giving big payoffs to Halliburton (co-incidentally owned by the Cheney family). And since there wasn't enough in the Treasury to do this in style, we borrowed money from communist China and ran up the national debt to pay for it. Then, once the fallout from the Republican deregulation of corporations kicked in and the market started collapsing, the tax dollars are also being stretched to bail out the Wall Street fat cats.
Like 80% of Americans, I am sick of this particular redistribution plan.
Obama's plan reduces taxes on 95% of Americans. The other 5% of us (who make over $250,000 a year) can afford to pay an extra 3%. That extra 3% comes out to only $300 for every $10,000 they make above $250,000. If you make over $250,000 a year, $300 probably doesn't mean much to you. The other source of increased revenue will be making corporations that ship jobs overseas pay a higher share of tax. Right now, these corporations pay a lower share than companies that keep their employees in the USA. No more incentives to hurt America. We all can agree with that.
Obama promises to go through the Federal budget line by line and cut all the wasteful spending. He promises to have transparency, a website where you can go and actually see the real Federal budget, not the made for TV version you can access under Bush.
Furthermore, Obama's economic plans will lead to a strong economy, an educated workforce, more American based jobs, affordable health care, and freedom from foreign oil. We will regain our position as a world leader, a nation that spreads democracy not with guns and threats, but with prosperity and diplomacy.
How do I know this? I read Obama's Blueprint for Change. And I compared it to what McCain had to offer (more tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, more wars, a really inadequate health plan, and the stated intention of overturning Roe v. Wade). You really should visit the websites of both candidates and read their platforms.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d4a6RNhCUo
http://www.johnmccain.com/Issues/jobsforamerica/
Posted By: Concerned Canadian @ 10/29/2008 3:23:12 PM
Comment: Now Barack Hussein Obama is a close friend of and praises a PLO supporter in Rashid Khalid
and the LA Times has the video tape proof.
Obama makes Bill Belichek look like an angel with all these disturbing videos floating around of
Obama's radical associations.
It???s pretty easy for Obama or anyone else to attack George Bush on his economic policies but Obama can't attack George Bush on his record on fighting terrorists to protect America while he
is busy wining and dining with terrorists !!
Barack Hussein Obama should be tried for treason and being a threat to US national security.
Barack says he has the right to distribute your money the way he sees fit. That???s dictatorship.