We’ve always known a stimulus package was coming. The economy’s so uncertain, people are so desperate for reassurance, the consensus for government relief is so broad that there wasn’t much doubt that this would happen. Given Barack Obama’s messiah-like popularity, Democrats’ huge majorities in both houses, and all the new New Deal rhetoric being thrown around, we also could’ve guessed that the final legislation would be massive, bold, and full of initiatives dear to liberal hearts. We may not have known all the specifics, but we were expecting one hell of a package.
But that’s when we thought we would actually get a stimulus package.
Instead, what’s cleared the House of Representatives is a mass of opportunism. Democrats are using this crisis to push through every program they’ve long cherished. Some of the programs are artsy and cheap-in a bill that totals $825 billion, I’m using the word relatively-like the $150 million going to the Smithsonian or the $50 million to the National Endowment for the Arts. Others take up important environmental issues on a massive scale: $400 million for global warming research and $2.4 billion for carbon-capture. $600 million is buying Uncle Sam new cars. That’s a lot of cup holders.
Many of these programs may have merit. Global warming’s real and it’s going to take international cooperation on a scale rarely seen before to forestall it. As an actor, I don’t mind a kickback from the government in the form of an NEA grant; it makes me feel like I have a real career like predatory lending or Ponzi scheming.
But those are debates the American people deserve to have. There are good arguments for and against all these programs. That they’re going to help people losing their homes, jobs and life savings isn’t one of them.
The Wall Street Journal took a look at the bill and estimated that only $90 out of the $825 billion-or roughly 12 percent – is going to actual stimulus. This doesn’t take into account the $252 billion for programs like food stamps and Medicaid which will encourage spending from those who can really use it, but even if that entire sum is lumped in, the total still comes to only about 43 percent of the bill.
I’m reminded of that scene in “It’s a Wonderful Life” when the banks around town are going under and Mr. Potter’s buying them all up. He takes a national crisis and exploits it to do what he’s wanted to all along: seize control of Bedford Falls. “Potter isn’t selling; Potter’s buying,” Jimmy Stewart tells worried onlookers. “And why? Because we’re panicking and he’s not.”
It’s the same thing here. The country’s terrified for good reason. Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama are using this fear to implement programs liberals have always wanted. By lumping them together in one bill and slapping the word stimulus across the front, Democrats can avoid the serious scrutiny these policies would have to face under normal circumstances.
One of the reasons Obama became president was his inspiring call to end the politics of division in Washington. Although Democrats in the Senate have indicated they may be willing to compromise with Republicans, House Democrats weren’t able to win over any of their colleagues across the aisle. While a lot of this has to do with both principled and partisan opposition, aside from some token compromises Democrats didn’t seem all that interested in making major concessions to legitimate concerns. To quote House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, “We won the election. We wrote the bill.” You can almost hear the “boo yah” in her voice; bipartisanship be damned.
We’ve seen this kind of thing before. For the last eight years, the ruling party showed disdain for its opponents and used crises to avoid debate. This is the first test of Obama’s leadership. On the campaign trail he indicated he’d learned from his predecessor’s failures. It’s time for him to prove it.
Nathaniel French is a sophomore theater studies and math double major. He can be reached for comment at [email protected].
