RSS Feed MenuWilliam Safire used to write a column in which he’d try to read the mind of some world leader and imagine what Mikhail Gorbachev or Anwar Sadat really thought, as opposed to the diplomatic niceties they were obliged to utter aloud.
In homage to the master, let me try an imitation: reading Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s mind:
“Everybody asks me what the next plan is. There is no plan! We have broken our leg and we have to wait for the leg to heal. It’s just a matter of time. And most of the bright ideas to heal faster will only make things worse.”
David Frum, August 30, 2010
This was not like — there was not one flip — switched a flip and then the economy would somehow get better overnight. I think as you heard the President discuss, we did not get into this problem and did not get into this crisis in a short period of time; it took a number of years. And it’s going to take a while to get out of that crisis.
Robert Gibbs, White House Press Secretary, August 30, 2010
Oldskool // Aug 30, 2010 at 6:37 pm
They could help by extending the home buyers rebate/credit and letting the Bush tax cuts lapse at the $350k mark. A bone to po’ rich folk.
easton // Aug 30, 2010 at 8:17 pm
Oldskool, right. Democrats have the problem of being stymied by the filibuster, otherwise there are a million ideas they would love to put forward, this from Jonathan Cohn over at TNR:
Remember when Republicans were complaining about “uncertainty”? As the argument went, businesses weren’t expanding and hiring new workers because they feared struggling with new regulations and taxes. Businesses, the Republicans said, needed certainty and financial relief.
Apparently Republican thinking has evolved, as Steve Benen at Washington Monthly and Pat Garofalo at Wonk Room explain today. In late July, the Democrats were poised to pass a small-business assistance bill, full of tax breaks and other incentives designed to reward small businesses that hire new workers. But, as always, the Democrats were one vote short in the Senate. And not one Republican agreed to sign on.
So where does that leave small business? Via USA Today:
Small businesses have put hiring, supply buying and real estate expansion on hold as they wait out the vote on a small-business-aid bill that stalled in the Senate earlier this summer.
The much-debated legislation offers tax breaks and waived loan fees. But it also comes with more divisive components, such as a $30 billion fund that would help community banks give loans to small businesses. Opponents say the fund would be a mini version of the often-criticized TARP large-bank bailout program.
Many small businesses had hoped the legislation would pass the Senate by the end of July. With two weeks left until Congress reconvenes, those firms are in a holding pattern.
“I’m still waiting for Congress to sign off on the bill,” says Amarjit Kaur, who runs a convenience store and gas station in Wood Village, Ore. She leases her property but has a chance to buy it. With the waived-fee provision, Kaur says she could save about $35,000 on her pending loan.
Kaur’s is among about 1,000 other small businesses that “have their bank papers all done and will be funded in the days — moments — after the bill passes,” says U.S. Small Business Administration Administrator Karen Mills.
Benen notes that the bill is deficit neutral, so this isn’t a spending issue. Garofalo sums is up this way:
The credit crunch affecting small businesses is very real and this bill could help alleviate it, getting those businesses loans to expand and hire. But Republicans have been tying it up in procedural knots for months, while simultaneously complaining that the Obama administration is not doing enough to aid small businesses. That’s a convenient political game to play, but it leaves actual small businesses out to dry.
Update: I originally wrote, incorrectly, that the Wonk Room item came from Igor Volsky. My apologies. Clearly I need to start reading more carefully or start getting even more caffeine.
Oldskool // Aug 30, 2010 at 8:47 pm
Per usual, the whole debate will come down to one or two congresscritters taking a stand on something in it they think will score points with a few thousand voters. And then everyone throws their hands up and goes home to campaign.
A subject I think needs to be discussed (somewhere) is this: Is the tactic of Republicans to choose party over country in recent years the result of a conscious or a subconscious decision?
GEValle // Aug 31, 2010 at 7:54 am
Stupid debate.
The fix to the economic down-turn of ‘08 and ‘09 was simple: Across-the-board tax-cuts for individuals and for business to enhance a real stimulus, not a Keynsian-inspired nightmare of non-stop Government spending. Had this been enacted, the recession would have ended in Autumn of 2009.
The Democrats keep trying to create the myth that Bush and the Republicans are responsible for the financial crash of ‘08, when nothing could be further from the truth. Bush’s abandonment of Conservative principles and his late embrace of Keynsian theories did not help, but neither did having the Democrtas in charge of the Congressional purse strings, nor electing an incompetent, economically illiterate fool to the White House.
sinz54 // Aug 31, 2010 at 10:16 am
Oldskool:
If Obama and his policies were widely popular, then the Republicans would be under considerable pressure to go along with them. At least moderate Repubs like Collins, Snowe, etc. They would be hearing from their constituents that they must cooperate with Obama.
But that’s not happening.
The reason why even moderate Repubs like Collins have dug in their heels now, is because they sense that Obama and his policies have become unpopular even with their constituents.
And that’s the same reason why moderate Dems are now running away from Obama–and even running campaign ads highlighting their independence from both Obama and Pelosi.
What both moderate Dems and moderate Repubs are hearing in their own districts, is that those voters want representatives who will act as watchdogs on Obama, not cheerleaders.
And that’s what these politicians are responding to.
Oldskool // Aug 31, 2010 at 10:25 am
“If Obama and his policies were widely popular, then the Republicans would be under considerable pressure to go along with them.”How soon we forget. Even though the mudslinging began before he took office, he was hugely popular. And his policies still poll much better than (R) policies as long as they aren’t labeled as belonging to one party or another. Which means the constant mudslinging from (R)s have taken a toll, which was their purpose from day one.
A good example is health care. The town halls and all the hyperventilating from the Right were meant to drive polls down so they could then point to the polls and say, aha!, it’s unpopular. Surprise surprise.
Since then, polls on the health care bill have gone up without the constant sniping from the Right. It’s a tactic they use effectively. Even though those tactics are not in the best interest of the country, that’s entirely beside the point. The whole point is that your party’s interest is always in front of the country’s interest.
The saddest part is that the base of your party falls for it every time, even when it goes against their own welfare.