 by Karl Frisch |
COMMENTARY
President Obama and Mitt Romney may be scheduled for their first of three debates Wednesday, but there is really no debate when it comes to the progress we have made on jobs and how much further along on the path to recovery we might be if the GOP would just get out of the way.
Let us start with a primer on the facts for those just tuning in and our tea party brethren who fumble for their grasp on reality.
By the time Barack Obama was sworn into office in January of 2009, we were losing hundreds of thousands of jobs each month with the number reaching nearly 1 million some months. For that, we can thank the reckless economic policies of George W. Bush and the most corrupt and unethical Republican Congressional majority in a century.
After signing the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, saving the American auto industry, and about a year of tough, focused work, President Obama brought the Bush job losses to a halt and ushered in 30 straight months of private sector job grown. Thus far, that is 4.6 million private sector jobs in total.
I write "private sector" with purpose. When President Bush oversaw the end of a significantly smaller recession in 2003, he did so thanks in no small part to an assist in the form of increased public sector employment — you know, government workers like teachers, firefighters, and police officers.
While President Obama saw the worst economic situation since the Great Depression as a call to action for millions in need, Republicans in power across the country saw it as an opening to cripple public employee labor unions which have traditionally supported their opponents. Public sector layoffs began with great conservative zeal.
The politicization of our national economic crisis was not surprising. Remember, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell has regularly stated that the number one goal for Senate Republicans is making Obama a one-term President while other GOP leaders like vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan participated in a secret meeting to discuss strategies for crippling the newly minted Obama presidency on the very night of his inauguration.
If "public sector" employment had instead increased under Obama's tenure at the same pace it had during the Bush years, we would be looking at nearly 1.5 million more jobs on the books, which would lower the unemployment rate by almost a single point to 7.1 percent.
With the success of Obama's Recovery Act and other initiatives threatening the GOP's "one-term" machinations for the President, the Republican Party has stood in the way of almost every White House economic initiative including the American Jobs Act, which would have been good for as many as 2.6 million additional jobs.
Is it any wonder that Republicans have become the Party of no? If they had said yes, our unemployment might be in the range of 5.5 to 6.5 percent by now and the President would be kicking Mitt Romney's rear end even more thoroughly than he is already.
Despite Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus' claim that Republicans have "specifics coming out of our eyeballs," Romney has been mum when it comes to the details of his job creation plans.
The GOP standard-bearer might as well be a ventriloquist dummy operated by George W. Bush. After all, he is using the same policy rhetoric employed by our most recent failed Republican President -- cut taxes on the wealthy so it trickles down to the rest of us, reduce spending on programs that help working families in need, and gut consumer protections and government regulations to pad the bottom lines of corporations that are already doing quite well.
With the spirit of Bush influencing Romney's words on the campaign trail should we not assume that the former Massachusetts Governor's legislation-signing hand would be equally possessed by Bushian demons if it ever managed to find itself in the Oval Office?
Three quarters of the first presidential debate are rightfully reserved for discussing economic issues. Since Mitt Romney's approach to creating jobs would be the political equivalent of doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different result, I am hoping Jim Lehrer of PBS -- the debate's moderator -- will devote considerable time probing Romney's economic insanity.
Copyright © 2012 KarlFrisch.com, distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.
Karl Frisch is Democratic political strategist at Bullfight Strategies based in Washington, DC. He can be reached at KarlFrisch.com. This column has been edited by the author. Representations of fact and opinions are solely those of the author.
Leave a Comment:
Amen!!! the GOP wants to destroy our system of government...They want the top ten percent to be Queen Bees....and everyone else to be slave worker bees...the GOP wants the top 10% to take all the honey from the land...and leave the spoiled product and ruined environment for the rest of us..it's not their problem they will just go to another country. Take and destroy should be their " MOTTO"...Like a leach they suck the blood out of others until there is no life left in a company and then they move on to the next one..
Romney now wants to do the same with countries....and he is starting at HOME where he first got a foot in the door as an elected governor...
How amusing. The socialists and the liberals try convince any dope that will listen (like you) that they aren't creating just that culture. They want to reduce us to elitists who are friends of the party and destroy the middle class, forcing as many as possible onto the government dole. You describe the situation the Democrats are creating. Who's going to another country? Ignorant liberal policies have already brought half of Europe to it's knees. I laugh out loud with the liberal rhetoric this week about the upcoming debate! It seems you people think it shouldn't happen, as Romney's already lost. You twits couldn't appear more afraid of what might happen when this president has to defend his actions. Solyndra, Smith Electric, Amonix. The liberal media didn't tell you about the others? Anti-US energy policy. Legislating from the White with this amnesty that violates the laws we have. Executive orders to promote an agenda that the people would never pass. You liberals are all alike. Conservatives want to be left alone to live our lives as we wish, and you dopes want to tell everyone else what to do. I have to go. Sharpton's on and it's funny to listen to him try to speak English.
Your arguments are confusing because they jump all over the place. We live in a socialist country, so get used to it, it has been that way since the 50s. Everybody in the country gets benefits from the US Government and everybody in the country, who has any money at all pays tax, unlike large parts of Europe, India, China etc. This is neither liberal or conservative - but cultural. The US has a policy for energy expansion on all fronts - so you will have to get a little more specific about why you think the US is anti-energy. Bush and other Republican administrations have supported and subsidized many different businesses throughout the years, so Solyndra and others should not come as a surprise under the Democrats, since it has been common practice to help business regardless of party. Conservatives have been imposing their intrusive agenda on many different types of people that they do not like - women, blacks, gays, Latinos, union members, etc. The reason is simple - if these folks vote Democrat - they are considered the enemy of Republicans. Anybody who disagrees with a self proclaimed conservative is labeled a liberal, but not many people in the country are actually liberal - they are usually just moderate, but in comparison to a right wing extremists - are seen as being liberal. Your comment about Rev. Sharpton speaks volumes about your racism. The problems with American decline follows closely with the rise of conservative Republicanism - you can chart it. The debt we are in is a result - not of liberals - but of flawed conservative policy over decades.
Funny thing...the job growth didn't happen until Obama was forced to stop meddling with the economy........
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=net_1mth
30 straight months of job growth????Looks like 23....
Obama got his stimulus.....you know the one that was going to save all those jobs....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJu0DgpiK8c
The stimulus did not do what Obama said it would do....
Yeah, it did. Read Michael Grunwald's book.
What's that book got to do with Obama failing to deliver what he said would do? Obama said it would make him a one term president
Here is an article by Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman called the "Great Abdication." The article talks about the comparisons with FDR's cutback in 1937 to more austerity than stimulus that put the American economy back into recession to the austerity we are talking about now. Its not the time to worry about deficits or austerity. We have a chronic unemployment problem right now that needs addressing. Until we deal with our chronic unemployment problem the budget deficit will not get show much improvement.
http: //www.nytimes.com/2012/06/25/opinion/krugman-the-great-abdication.html?_r=2&ref=economicstimulus&
We need massive stimulus on our infrastructure. We are $2.2 trillion behind in infrastructure spending according to the Society of American Civil Engineers. Here is an article that talks about this $2.2 trillion deficit in infrastructure investments and maintenance. The longer we wait the higher the costs go up in wasted man hours, traffic jams, wasted power from inefficient electrical grids, and huge amounts of wasted fresh water from leaking and rupturing water mains and sewer pipes.
http: //www.infrastructurereportcard.org/
Ezra Klein has an article in the Washington Post discussing our deferred investments in infrastructure. These deferred investments are another form of borrowing because our kids will need to fix our infrastructure only the longer we wait the more the infrastructure deficit will increase. Businesses and industry all pay huge costs with our inferior, antiquated, overused, and deteriorating infrastructure are not fixed up to modern levels.
http: //www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/31/AR2010123104609.html
Here is a 2011 Senate speech from Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa that discusses the need to increase stimulus spending on our infrastructure while reducing unneeded Cold War era type weapons, ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and allowing the Bush era tax cuts to expire.
http: //www.nacacnet.org/issues-advocacy/LegislativeNews/Documents/HarkinLtrJointComm.pdf
Here is another source from the Lease Foundation that discusses the $2.2 trillion infrastructure deficit in America:
http: //leasefoundation.org/IndRsrcs/MO/Infrastructure.htm
When the debates occur this election cycle we need to have journalists asking the two candidates what their plans are for fixing our $2.2 trillion maintenance backlog. Candidates need to give voters new ideas about how our infrastructure will be brought up to speed and how necessary projects like high speed rail are expanded.
Rex....If we had all these infrastructure "shovel ready" jobs.....why did Obama say we didn't have as many as we thought?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skAOLejB4BA
TAP: I don't care about shovel ready projects which was an issue during the stimulus bill debate back in 2009. I am talking about the $2.2 trillion in long term infrastructure needs that the American Society of Civil Engineers says we must have to fix our rapidly deteriorating and dangerously deficient infrastructure. For instance over 8,000 bridges across America fail to meet minimal safety standards. These bridges are also overused and passed their life expectancies. These bridges need to be torn down and replaced. We need a plan for $2.2 trillion over the next five years othe wise Americans will start dying from any number of avoidable disasters and our businesses and industry will be greatly hurt by inefficient infrastructure that greatly curtails modern commerce.
Hmm....American Society of Civil Engineers....You don't think they could be a little biased since they would stand to gain plenty from Civil Engineering Projects? They may not be but it is something to consider.
Also, where do you plant to get this 2.2 Trillion?
PAT: I get it the most important things are tax cuts for the plutocrats. God forgive me for thinking of the needs of the country like President Eisenhower who built the Interstate system. Why would any modern Republican want to be smart like older Republicans used to be like President Eisenhower.
Here are the alternatives that you fail to talk about. Let's see now, we should let our water mains burst wasting millions of gallons of valuable fresh water in many towns across the country. We should let our 100 year old sewers leak filthy untreated septic water into our homes and street so we can get diseases and die just like people in 3rd world countries do. We should let our bridges fall down with cars and families on them during rush hour. We should let our natural gas pipelines explode and kill innocent people. We should let our dams, levies, and ports deteriorate so shipping and commerce deteriorate and becomes prohibitively expensive.
We will raise the $2.2 trillion by taxing people and taxing businesses, and giving large corporations and the wealth the ability to purchase bonds. We can also sell infrastructure bonds like we sold war bonds during WW II. The point is that if we want to keep a modern society functioning we can not have old worn out infrastructure. We can not have a thriving economy in the 21st century with 1950's infrastructure that is worn out, obsolete, and grossly inefficient. Every dollar you spend on infrastructure is regained by increased commerce and economic growth. Unlike giving rich people tax breaks who squander the money in Wall Street swindling schemes that go boom to bust, infrastructure spending always generates more money in the economy than it cost to build it. The Erie Canal paid for itself in just a few years by increased commerce that made goods like grain, cheap to sell even to Europe in the 19th century. The same can happen again with bullet trains in the 21st century. Its what George Bush "41" called the "vision thing."
I have no problem with Infrastructure growth Rex....but I don't see how your going to tax the rich enough to get over 2 Trillion Dollars without crippling the private sector. I know you don't believe these people create jobs.....but they do. If you keep making the US a hostile environment for the rich.....they will take their wealth and jobs somewhere else. You can raise taxes on the rich but that doesn't mean Revenue will go up.
Romney's insanity extends to this: reports are that John Thain, head of Merrill Lynch (which had to be rescued by B of A and who had spent company money on such things as a black marble bathroom with gold fixtures for his own office suite) is on Mitt's short list for Sec. of the Treasury.
What reports say that? Are you saying he embezzled money? Did he commit a crime or is it that you just don't like black marble? Do you prefer white marble?
How many words does Sharpton make up in a minute? Is he drunk? Isn't it time for MSNBC to pull out the big guns? He's a riot!
The Presidential Debates will hurt Obama and he knows it.....why else would he be pushing for early voting?
well pat, did it ever occur to you that all democrats are pushing early voting because they expect illegal voting obstruction at the polls. they expect that republican controlled election offices will do what has happened in florida and ohio?
republicans have used diebold voting machines which have been proven to be hackable and may have affected the 2000 and 2004 elections.
we all realize that the facts are inconvenient to right wingers like pat, but to ask such a stupid question as he/she does shows a complete lack of any intellectual credibility.
More excuses and insults....from the self proclaimed marvilus.
This is about the most intelligent, comprehensive article written about the goings-on in the country today, but conservatives(republicans), will neither get nor appreciate facts .Thank you Karl Frisch!