Opinion Editorials
Email
Print
Making Stew
ADVERTISEMENT
Published: February 4, 2009
The debate over the economic-stimulus plan winding its way through Congress is beginning to resemble a good, old-fashioned Brunswick stew with all manner of politicians standing around the cook making recommendations.
The recipe for Brunswick stew, which has its roots in early 19th-century Virginia, varies greatly by cook and by region, but is generally full of a variety of vegetables and meats and is traditionally cooked over an open fire in a big iron pot.
Just like the stimulus plan, there is no official recipe for Brunswick stew, and the number of cooks probably makes little difference. But the proof is in the tasting.
That's about where we are with the stimulus plan. There seem to be as many theories about what is needed as there are members of Congress. Even among Democrats, who have the upper hand, there is disagreement. Economists of all stripes are certain about their uncertainty. And we have a new president who seems very diligent, but who as far as we know has never made Brunswick stew before.
With the numbers of jobless rising by the thousands every day, consumer confidence slumping and stores and businesses bolting their doors, the uncertainty over the plan is quite disconcerting.
Let's break down the arguments. Republicans, who voted unanimously against the $819 billion stimulus package in the House, say that it is top-heavy with government spending programs -- $87 billion to help states pay for Medicaid, for example -- that will not produce new jobs, at least not during the recession. And more important, the plan is far too light on tax cuts for ordinary Americans, which they view as critical to stimulating the economy.
The Democrats believe that the $145 billion for tax cuts for low-income workers in their House bill will stimulate buying, while the spending on infrastructure projects, such as road and bridge construction ($30 billion), will create jobs. Other spending -- $150 billion for schools, for example -- reflects legitimate needs and, they believe, will lead to new innovation and new jobs.
Some spending in the plan is obviously designed to fix some badly neglected programs and projects. Who would argue with $7 billion to upgrade military housing? Returning veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan are living in housing with inadequate plumbing. About $5 billion is earmarked for green energy and wind-power initiatives, and $2.8 billion for a rural broadband program. The job-creation potential of both -- at least in the short term -- is suspect.
Republican Congresswoman Virginia Foxx of the 5th District, who voted against the House bill, said, "There is a time and a place to discuss the merits of additional funding for federal programs. In the meantime, putting a pile of new and expansive government spending into a bill that is supposed to help the economy is very misguided."
She's right. The Senate should examine each of these domestic-spending proposals and remove or scale down those that most economists agree will not create jobs within the next year to 18 months. Some of this is already happening.
Similarly, the conference committee must take up the task of reaching consensus on the correct level of tax cuts to include in the final legislation. The current Senate bill includes $325 billion for tax cuts and $560 billion in spending. We don't know if that's the correct ratio, or not.
The goal should be job creation. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that between 1.2 million to 3.6 million jobs will be created as a result of the initiatives in the House version of the stimulus plan. That estimate conjures up an old saying -- "Close enough for government work."
It's not close enough for government work anymore. That mentality has brought us to this historic precipice. It's time for all in Congress to roll up their sleeves, put differences aside and get to work to craft the right compromise plan to bring us out of this mess. The final bill should be a product of the best minds of our generation working with a spirit of compromise and respect -- which we believe is the true nature of President Obama -- to heal our nation.
If we indeed are entering a new era of cooperation toward sound, thoughtful governing, then let this be the first waypoint. We'll celebrate in the fall with a pot of Brunswick stew.
Email
Print
