Republicans Oppose Stimulus, Laud It
 |
James Joyner | Saturday, February 14, 2009 |
Steve Benen points to a couple of Republicans who voted against the stimulus package but nonetheless like the spending going to their districts. Not surprising, really: One can oppose a massive omnibus bill and still like parts of it. And, for that matter, one can want stimulus money for one’s district and still think a similar stimulus for the other 434 districts adds up to a massive boondoggle.
To be sure, there are Republicans — maybe a majority of them — who are simply playing politics here. But this is a giant, complicated mess so it’s to be expected that the reactions to it are convoluted.
About the Author: James Joyner is the publisher of Outside the Beltway and the managing editor of the Atlantic Council. He's a former Army officer, Desert Storm vet, and college professor with a PhD in political science from The University of Alabama. He lives just outside the Beltway in Alexandria, Virginia with his wife and infant daughter.
Follow James on FriendFeed | Twitter | Digg
- Republicans Oppose Stimulus, Laud It
- Obama: ‘I Won’
- Obama Poll Numbers Dropping
- Now That’s a Stimulus Package (Updated)
- House Passes Stimulus with Zero Republican Votes
- Stimulus?
- A Question of Stimulus
- The Three Worst Bills
- More Right Wing Anti Stimulus Nonsense
- Obama Attacks Republicans For Partisanship
- Making Jobs More Expensive
- House Trades Freedom for Health Coverage, Senate’s Move
- Hasan a Muslim First, American Second?
- OTB Caption JamTM
- Taking “No” As Iran’s Answer
- Update on the Fort Hood Massacre
- OTB Latenight – Soft Cell
- Caption Contest Winners
- Breaking: Shootings at Fort Hood (Updated)
- Pentagon Expected To Ask For Supplementary War Funding. As Usual.
Republicans want to cut other people's government spending, just not that which benefits their state or Congressional district. This mirrors the Democrats who want to increase taxes on everyone, except for themselves. The only real difference between the two is that Dems have been a little more likely to balance taxes and spending. Since supply side came in, Republicans have only increased debt.
Steve
I am taken just now, and somewhat amused by the notion that the vectors involved with this post and that of "God and Disaster" are quite similar in that the constructs are so massive that they are not easily explained. So massive, that seemingly self conflicting positions, may not be so.
I suppose I'll have to think about this a bit more.
And so even before the signing of the bill the construction of the fall-back position of the 'the Republicans made me do it' begins. Someone needs to get faster drying ink for the Presidents pens.
My prize for the best headline goes to:
Is $800 Billion Too Big or Too Small? Yes.
As I've said, the situation (arguably a compromise) supports both fringes ... for now.
I suppose that if the downturn becomes more severe (more than the typical voter now expects), it will be net-bad for Republicans. I mean in a mild recession they have cover for a "natural" recovery, but in an arguable depression, less so:
In a historic first, S&P 500 companies will post a net loss
(Go ahead, someone tell me that those earnings are imaginary, fear-mongering.)
In case anyone wants to float again the idea that this mess is less than it appears, and an invention of US liberals, consider this fragment from John Maudlin (via Barry Ritholz RSS feed):
In a few paragraphs I am going to put up a chart from Nouriel Roubini’s RGE Monitor on the size of US bank losses, and in a few pages I’ll comment on the Geithner “plan” for rescuing US banks. We have indeed dug ourselves a very deep hole here in the US.
But European banks may be in far worse shape. Bruno Waterfield of the London Daily Telegraph reports to have seen an eyes-only document prepared by the European Commission for the finance ministers of the various EU member countries. The problem revealed in the report is an estimated write-down by European banks in the range of 16 trillion pounds, or about $25 trillion dollars! The concern is that bailing out the various national banks for such an unbelievable amount would push the cost of government borrowing to much higher levels than we see today.
I'd give a link but I don't see the article on the http://www.ritholtz.com site, yet.
If $25T have been removed from the European economy, our stimulus is (as some fear) small change.
If $25T have been removed from the European economy, our stimulus is (as some fear) small change.
And yet, we are encouraged to become more like the Europeans as a solution to this problem. What's wrong with this picture?
