The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age
    The Liberal Mob's picture

    Where Do We Go From Here?

    By The Liberal Mob on Thu, 08/04/2011 - 6:47pm |

    The title asks a question, so here is a picture of The Question.

     

    The last few weeks have, with good reason, worried liberals and others.  Once again, we have seen the only political party that even attempts to speak for any of our concerns fail horribly.  The debt ceiling debate was an inherently winnable policy fight on a number of different grounds.  While the ultimate deal (as we noted in its aftermath) is better than we could expect considering how badly the Democratic leadership failed, it still amounts to a loss in terms of the debate.  It legitimizes Republican bad economics.  It legitimizes "austerity".  None of this is particularly good.

    Given all that, it's worth taking a moment to figure out how the Democratic Party can recover strategically from this sort of a failure.  It's a good question.  Fortunately, there are answers.

    As it happens, with Congress going into recess, the President has an opportunity to reshape the debate.  It seems that he already planned to do that as well, as he's scheduled a tour of the Midwest, allegedly to discuss the jobs issue.  With Congress in recess, all eyes will be on the President for a while.  In a real way, this is nearly the beginning of the 2012 campaign season for him.  The next couple weeks are a good opportunity to set up and retool for the campaign in the wake of a fairly significant defeat.

    If what we get is the Campaign version of the President, rather than the actual President of the last year or so, then this tour could re-energize some of the base and create a groundswell of support for spending on jobs.  This is important both in terms of fixing the economy, but also politically.  People are still worried about high unemployment and the dearth of good-paying jobs, and for good reason.  With Congress quiet for a while the President can stake out a position as being more serious about jobs than the Republicans in Congress.  More important, a return of Candidate Obama could see more pushback against failed and outright wrong Republican policy ideas.

    Now, some of that of course depends on the White House and President Obama realizing the position that they are in.  While they have handled some things decently, the recent debt ceiling fight does call the President's policy goals and overall political judgment into question in a way that previous events have not.  Given the alternative (a hypothetical President Perry, President Bachmann or President Romney), we need to hope that the President is able to seize this opportunity and show more of the acumen we thought we could expect.

    That's all just about the Presidency though.  While ensuring that the White House stays out of the hands of the GOP is a worthy goal, there are other considerations.  The Senate picture is not pretty, and of course the House is currently in GOP hands.  It would be a Pyrrhic victory to re-elect President Obama but have neither house of Congress.  So there needs to be some focus there if there is to be a hope of defending any sort of sanity in the national political structure.

    Of course, it seems like the President is more than capable of taking care of business on the campaign trail, and is outfundraising...well, everyone.  That makes the course of action obvious for liberals annoyed with the President.  There are going to be plenty of Congressional candidates out there who need your help, time, and money.  So give it to them instead!  That would be a lot more productive, and have a better chance of success, than trying to primary President Obama.

    It doesn't just stop there either.  There are local races and concerns too.  More involvement from liberals in city and county party organizations can, over time, push the center of the party further left.  In turn, that will push the realm of "acceptable" and "sensible" policies along with it.  That's a long-term goal of course, but it needs to start sometime.

    Overall, the failure in the debt ceiling deal really underscores how much work there is for liberals to do right now.  We've seen what happens when Republicans try to "govern" (hint: they don't).  And we've also seen what happens when the party that tries to represent us acts like everything is business as usual (hint: they fail).  There are opportunities to fix things, though, and we need to take advantage of them.  And if we're lucky, and we try to do more, then as 2012 approaches just maybe we'll see the Democratic party start to do the same.

    Or maybe we're all screwed.  But at least we can think about a way out.  And maybe it'll work.

    Read more from The Liberal Mob at our other humble blogging abode at The Liberal Mob.

    Comments

    The trouble for Obama is that after spending the last two years without addressing unemployment, an election year campaign focus on jobs will likely ring hollow.

    But better late than never, I suppose.


    by Michael Wolraich on Fri, 08/05/2011 - 12:44am

    If liberals would spend 1/10th of the time thinking about sound actual policies and how to get them implemented that they spend thinking about elections, polls, electoral processes, horse races, campaigns, personalities and other forms of political masturbation, something useful might actually get done.

    What actual policies is Barack Obama going to advocate?

    Will they have any significant impact, even if activated?

    How do we get him to promote policies that would be maximally effective?

    How do we get maximally effective policies quickly through Congress?

    What options does Obama have for direct executive action that does not require passing legislation?

    So far, it looks to me like Obama is going to spend his time doing a lot of meaningless talking, promoting policies that would be marginally effective at best, and that are such that they could be endorsed by any run-of-the-mill Republican administration, e.g. passing free trade pacts.


    by Dan Kervick on Fri, 08/05/2011 - 1:02am

    Excellent comments on the malaise of the Obama administration.


    by Oxy Mora on Fri, 08/05/2011 - 8:14am

    I think part of the problem is this: mainstream political discourse discourages complexity, and encourages sound bites.  So when someone says "we need to focus on jobs," then there's some sort of implicit meaning based on who the speaker is and where/to whom they are speaking.  Everything happens in a sort of political shorthand.

    In my case, when I think "focus on jobs," that really means "do whatever is possible to increase aggregate demand."  So under that umbrella is extending and increasing unemployment benefits, authorizing lots of infrastructure spending in critical areas, even things like general development or beautification (hell, paying people to plant trees in places that need some trees, who cares?) are fine.  Also, the general hemorrhaging of public sector jobs needs to stop somehow, although some of that is state-level and thus out of the President's hands.

    As long as it gets money into the hands of actual people in the short term it's good, and if it creates even marginal added-value in the future it's even better.  Once that happens, lots of businesses will reach a point where it's economically feasible to hire people.  And once they can hire more people the cycle becomes more self-sustaining.

    You do underline some important problems though.  The main one is that most of this can't or won't be done by the Executive branch unilaterally.  That's why Congress has to be moved, somehow.  Pressure is good.  Winning more seats is better.  I think it's possible to do.


    by The Liberal Mob on Fri, 08/05/2011 - 2:18pm

    I don't think Obama is going to do any of those things.  They all call for a level of fiscal activism that for which the conservative Obama and his conservative advisers Immelt, Daley and Geithner lack both the ideological predisposition and the political stomach.

    When Obama says he is going to focus on jobs, what he means mostly is that he is going to try to pass more Latin American free trade pacts and try to get the Chinese to let the value of the yuan float higher.


    by Dan Kervick on Fri, 08/05/2011 - 5:56pm

    As far as Giethner is concerned it was just commented on at MSNBC that Geithner is the one standing in the way of the infrastructure bank. And Immelt, well I just gave him my ideas.

    I have appreciated your flinty and gritty, New Hampshire let's get to it, get it done attitude. Patience for platitudes is getting in short supply.


    by Oxy Mora on Fri, 08/05/2011 - 6:05pm

    Granite, not flint :)


    by Dan Kervick on Fri, 08/05/2011 - 7:18pm

    DanK, as always, you are right on target.

    This ain't no liberal we've got in the White House. He ain't got any ideology whatsoever, it seems to me.

    But he does occupy the liberal placeholder in Washington's kabuki theater. Thus, if there is anything happening that ain't batshit crazy conservative, it is left for him to be involved. Thus, HCR is moved forward to appease the base. But not too much HCR, you see. In fact, HCR that is actually "Health Care INDUSTRY Profits Enhancement and Protection" masquerading as HCR is even better!

    HCR is only an example. There are numerous others, including banking reform (choke!) and fiscal budgeting and....

    Make no mistake. Wall Street and the corporations own it all. Inasmuch as Obama and the Dems are the "liberal faction," they will NEVER be allowed to be more liberal than the owners will allow.

    And all the handicapping of the horse race and delving into personalities and strategerizing and analyticalizing and political scientologyizing ain't never going to change that.

    In other words, we're fucked until we somehow get a handle on the pay-to-play bullshit. Totally, completely fucked.


    by SleepinJeezus on Sat, 08/06/2011 - 7:19pm

    Interesting point about concentrating on House candidates. The approval rate of Congress is 14%. Incumbents could have a very bad experience in 2012. It seems that Democrats might lose the Senate and perhaps the HR is a tossup. As far as Obama is concerned the best thing he has going for him is the lineup of possible Republican opponents. My contributions at the moment are going towards the Wisconsin recall, which I think is the greatest leverage I can get for a modest amount of money.

    I think Dan's point about finding ways for direct action that get around Congress is the last great hope of restoring optimism in the country and among Democrats ahead of the 2012 election. Unfortunately this would require audacity, flamboyancy and entrepreneurial behavior, qualities that seem nonexistent in the policy wonks who surround Obama.

    When I hear a statement like, "I didn't promise change tomorrow" I want to scream into a pillow.  


    by Oxy Mora on Fri, 08/05/2011 - 8:30am

    First if people want to get the discussion going, they need to provide specific programs and policies that government can implement that will drop the unemployment down to 6% or lower, and provide the price tag for those programs and policies.  In the end, pretty much everything people say is just a generalized "do something about jobs" or "they need to focus on creating jobs."  Because of changes in compensation for government funded jobs compared to the 1930s, implementing WPA-like programs would be vastly more expensive today to create the same number of jobs. 

    One thing to keep in mind is that even with the cuts implemented by the deal, the debt is still on track to rise over the next ten years.  Discussions about what to do about defense spending and the entitlement programs have to be on the table.  Neither of these can be sacred cows.  Punishing politicians for simply bringing up one or the other is what has gotten us in this mess. 

    It isn't hard to find people talking about Obama dismantling social security even though so far it hasn't been touched.  And the debate on social security is characterized in the end as either you are for preserving it as is or you're for gutting it.  There is no in-between.  As long as we stay entrenched in these positions, we will get deal scenarios like what we just went through.

    If Morning Joe is any indication of the debate in this country, then the "debacle in the beltway" has changed the debate for the better.  You conservatives and liberals and economists all saying we need jobs programs now, cuts over the decades with increased revenue now.  Everyone agrees the best way to bring the debt down is to create jobs and have the economy boom (unfortunately there is no bubble right now to save us and give a false sense of good times ahead)  Moreover, a good majority of Americans were disapproving of the Republicans during the debacle over the debt ceiling.  

    The current threat of the double-dip means the Republicans can't wait for after the election to impose the jobs initiatives that they have blocked ever since Obama took office.  If things had carried along on the edge of another recession they might have been able to, and what they were planning on.  Now when they return they have to act with the Dems and Obama to get something implemented.  In the past the cry of "obstructionists" hasn't been very effective with the voters.  It is different now.  Even the likes of Michael Steele seems on board with jobs programs and the sacrifice it will require in the short term - increase in taxes - in order to make it a reality.

    I am all for focusing on the elections of Representatives and Senators, as well as local politics.  In Indiana, like in other states, 2010 saw the Republicans take complete control of state politics.  Parting of the "noise" that Obama and other have to cut through is the rhetoric coming out of state politician mouths, who tend to parrot the same talking points of the federal breathen.  In my district Pence is leaving to run for governor (a prospect that makes me ill).  If I can help put a Dem in his seat, I will consider myself having done my part.  Even if that means we get someone like "blue dog" Brad Bookout in that seat.

    As long as there are Americans who will send the like of Cantor to represent them in DC, we will have a serious battle on our hands. 

    Going back to Morning Joe, the general sentiment out there is that one can save for retirement and send your kid to college.  In other words, we can deal with the long term issue of the debt (over 20 and 30 years) and implement an effective jobs program in the here and now.  As long as liberals refuse to include the former into the discussion, they will be as guilty of stalling progress as the conservatives who refuse to include the latter into the discussion.

     


    by Elusive Trope on Fri, 08/05/2011 - 10:07am

    The problem is, we lost the "austerity" debate long before it was joined or not joined.

    We have to change the common wisdom about economic matters. This isn't that easy. Summers made the point well: The challenge with the Keynesian prescription is that it prescribes MORE spending and borrowing to cure a problem caused by too much spending and borrowing.

    This is counter-intuitive and even scary, for some, to think about. MUCH easier to think about cutting back when you've overspent and over-borrowed.

    In general, I agree with Dan above.


    by Peter Schwartz on Fri, 08/05/2011 - 1:32pm

    Where was this version of Larry Summers when he was in a position to influence policy?  To hell with that fat, greasy, self-promoting piece of shit. 


    by brewmn on Fri, 08/05/2011 - 2:53pm

    I have to be frank here but I aint votin for anyone other than my President. No discussion.

    I aint votin for any Congress contender except for a dem from my district...a district that has been dem since I was born except for the last election when we elected an idiot.

    Amy is not up for election until next year. And Al is good til 2016--thank the good Lord.

    The repubs on any level--state, county, municipal--are the bane; the opposite of anything I have ever believed in.

    I have to admit that Nixon looks pretty good right now.

    I have to admit that Ronny looks pretty good right now!

    And George H.W.Bush does not look that bad right now. haahahahaha

    George W. Bush was the single worst president I have ever witnessed in my 6 decades plus!

    But America voted him to a second term--although the repubs did in fact steal Ohio but who cares at this stage of the game.

    I think I am going to do a blog about the accomplishments of the first two years of the Obama Administration.

    Many great measures were put into play whether by executive order or otherwise.

    Grandma Pelosi accomplished so much and the dems dropped the ball in the Senate to the extent that some 480 pieces of legislation passed by the House were simply never addressed in the Senate.

    My buddy Smith would begin a new movement that I called the Peabaggers...But I do not see much future in that.

    Oh well...

    We shall again celebrate on Tuesday of next week and I ask Genghis to set up some live blog as we watch Wisconsin pricks go down the tubes...


    by Richard Day on Fri, 08/05/2011 - 3:01pm

    Dick...

    I'm sitting here looking out of my  window at the WI bluffs.  My wife works with a majority of Wisconsin coworkers.  She (a long time ago) decided that political support for Dems was a losing battle amongst her peers.  I pray your dreams come true on Tuesday! 


    by chucktrotter on Fri, 08/05/2011 - 6:34pm

    I'm a long way from Wisconsin but I've contributed to the Wisconsin recall effort through Pac's. I hope we win this one.


    by Oxy Mora on Fri, 08/05/2011 - 6:47pm

    Good work.  I should have done the same.Can't think why I didn't

     

     


    by Flavius on Sun, 08/07/2011 - 6:28pm

    Seconded.


    by moat on Sun, 08/07/2011 - 6:59pm