The Wall Street Journal Online has an article today discussing the emerging picture of Obama's probable economic policies. It is fraught with interest, for Democrats, Obama supporters, and the sort of people who have to read The Wall Street Journal.
As a bonus, its subsidiary title accurately points out exactly what the Obama campaign needs to do, or do more conspicuously ("Democratic Candidate is Just Beginning to Fill in the Blanks.") In Obama's case, that's what is needed more than anything else. Everyone ALREADY knows (to quote Deborah Solomon in the above-linked article) about "his biography, his charisma, and his early opposition to the Iraq war. And---speaking as a centrist Democrat---none of that would ever be enough to get him my vote in the primaries.
As I've said before, what's needed for the next go-round isn't charisma, but gravitas. The last thing I want at this crucial juncture in the history of our country and at this crossroads, maybe, in the fate of the entire world, is glamour. I need to hear more about what Obama is planning to do if elected. So far, his campaign isn't doing a stellar job of getting the press to focus on that (perhaps because the press has already tacitly crowned Queen Hillary to lead us out of the darkness?)
I've set out my own thoughts on this article, for what they're worth. I have a pretty keen sense of what changes in economic policy I would like to see in favor of my own interests, but very little sense---I want to be clear about this---about how such changes, if implemented, would affect the national and global economy. The economy is one of those systems that you can't tweak selectively because every tweak affects every component.
I know or "know" or at least have read or been told that one reason for allowing the wealthy to keep a lot of their money is because they traditionally recycle it, thereby sustaining industry and creating new jobs and paying the salaries of the worker bees like you and me and the benefits of people who are not employed.
Or, to quote Jerry Garcia of the Grateful Dead: "I don't know, but I've been told, if the horse won't pull you have to carry the load." So it really might be true, or partly true, or more true than not, that some of the run-off from the flow of tax breaks going to the wealthy eventually trickle into my little cup.
I know or "know" or have been told that tax policies that look pretty lumpy from a distance sometimes are put into place in order to lubricate the gears of some other part of the system that ultimately spins out benefits for everyone. If you are a conservative, you believe this with all your heart. If you are a liberal, you are skeptical. If you are a progressive, you think it's a pack of lies. If you are me, you don't know what to think.
The little cup I'm holding out is half-full, which means it is also half-empty. Will Obama or some other Democrat contrive to fill it? And if so, with what and from where or whom? Aye, there's the rub. Work it out for yourself. If you want to see the inside scoop on "Obamanomics" (a word I can foresee getting very tired of very quickly), you can look at his official website.
Anyway: the article. Deborah Solomon remarks:
[quote begins from the Wall Street Journal Online, "Seeking Clues to Obanomics"]
One example of how the Illinois Democrat might approach economic policy is an unusual bill he first introduced to little notice shortly after entering the Senate in 2005 -- and reintroduced last week. The "Health Care for Hybrids" proposal would offer federal assistance to car makers struggling with hefty retiree health-care costs in exchange for their building more fuel-efficient automobiles.
The legislation requires no sacrifice from labor unions and essentially allows Washington to set environmental goals for a powerful industry. The liberal American Prospect magazine singled out the proposal last year in a list of policy ideas it found promising. "Obama has come up with an audacious proposal."
While Mr. Obama's economic platform is still in its formative stages, interviews with his aides and a review of his congressional record and speeches suggest that Obamanomics may place him somewhat to the left of New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton....
Yet Mr. Obama has voted against a trade agreement and backs policies that redistribute income by taking revenue from the wealthiest to fund programs for middle- and lower-income households. Like most Democrats, he favors rolling back at least the portion of the Bush tax cuts that favor upper-income families.
"His view is not that the rich are doing too well," says one economic adviser. "But he wants to finance some of the programs to help the poor do better -- and the resources have to come from where people are doing better."
[quote ends]
I'm guessing that some of the phrases embedded in the carefully tempered language will set certain alarm bells ringing... "the liberal...magazine"...."audacious proposal"..."somewhat to the left of Hillary Clinton"..."redistribute income"...."upper income families"...."the rich are doing too well....the resources have to come from where people are doing better."
Is it possible for the rich ever to do too well?---is their prosperity not the grease that lubricates the machinery of commerce? Again, I don't know the answer to that, only what people who do claim to know have said to me. But I do know or "know" or at least believe that these people are not traditionally a big part of the Democratic candidate's base, though of course they have the resources to reach that base and to convince it that the Republicans are still the party of Jesus and will therefore never allow gay marriage.
Not being rich myself and with no hope of ever becoming so, and knowing nothing about economics other than what my liberal friends who allegedly do know have told me, I feel the old "visceral yes" when I read the objectives stated in the quoted text---or rather, to be more precise, I feel that the stated objectives chime with what I consider to be my own immediate best interests, as well as the best interests of CERTAIN PEOPLE who traditionally seem not to know where their own best interests lie. [The current trade non-protectionist policy torpedoed the economy of the South Carolina milltown where I grew up, contributing substantially (at least) to the closing of what was once the largest textile mill in the world under one roof. And yet...they go on voting Republican, apparently incapable of identifying a cause and effect relationship. My mom: "It's too late anyway. The mill's gone."]
I'll end up backing Clinton, I imagine---more on why later---but it's nice to see that Obama has his eye firmly on the end of the enormous continuum styling itself "middle class" where the Republicans' policies have inflicted the most pain.
Another hot button issue for me is health care. And here I have a problem. Solomon writes:
[quote begins from the Wall Street Journal Online, "Seeking Clues to Obanomics"]
Mr. Obama hasn't yet settled on the specifics of his health-care plan... Among his health-care goals is to keep costs low for business and find ways to "ensure that business can compete in a global economy and that not all the costs are being beared by individuals," an aide said.
[quote ends; emphasis in original]
Okay, what? Being "beared" by individuals? At first, I thought/hoped (maliciously) that Ms. Solomon had made a risible error, but then I went back and looked, and it's a quote, and that's what it says: "beared by individuals."
Is it a misprint? I hope it's a misprint. If your spokesperson can't conjugate an irregular verb, how can I possibly assume that he or she is qualified to explain your health care policies? I can conjugate an irregular verb, and I couldn't possibly claim to understand all the ramifications of a complex economic policy.
I have few unshakable convictions, but a belief that---outside of certain mathematical proofs---precise reasoning requires a pretty solid working grasp of grammar is one of them. The Obama needs to pass this on to any operative or aide who talks to the press.
In the meantime, if you want a summary of his health care platform, go here. It all sounds right to me, but---as noted--I'm waiting to see how they color in the outlines.
Comments