Right Wing Voices Speak

One of the things I strongly believe in is keeping apprised of what the radical Right is saying and evaluating whether they are making sense, are telling the truth, etc.

In this connection I recently read a column by Charles Krauthammer writing in the Washington Post of March 20 where he treats the flap over the AIG bonuses as the distraction that it was. As most will appreciate, I do not often agree with Mr. Krauthammer, but in some respects he expresses the same disdain for this relatively unimportant event that I did in my column of March 19 entitled “Economic Dilemmas," though he expresses no concern about what I view as a systemic problem. Nevertheless, I found it sufficiently interesting to want to share the portions of the column that reflect my own views.

“A $14 trillion economy hangs by a thread composed of (a) a comically cynical, pitchfork-wielding Congress, … (c) $165 million.

“That's $165 million in bonus money handed out to AIG debt manipulators who may be the only ones who know how to defuse the bomb they themselves built. Now, in the scheme of things, $165 million is a rounding error. It amounts to less than 1/18,500 of the $3.1 trillion federal budget. It's less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the bailout money given to AIG alone. For this we are going to poison the well for any further financial rescues, face the prospect of letting AIG go under (which would make the Lehman Brothers collapse look trivial) and risk a run on the entire world financial system?

“And there is such a thing as law. The way to break a contract legally is Chapter 11. Short of that, a contract is a contract. The AIG bonuses were agreed to before the government takeover and are perfectly legal. Is the rule now that when public anger is kindled, Congress will summarily cancel contracts?

“Even worse are the clever schemes being cooked up in Congress to retrieve the money by means of some retroactive confiscatory tax. The common law is pretty clear about the impermissibility of ex post facto legislation and bills of attainder. They also happen to be specifically prohibited by the Constitution. We're going to overturn that for $165 million?

“Geithner has been particularly maladroit in handling this issue. But the reason he didn't give the bonuses much attention is because he's got far better things to do -- namely, work out a rescue plan for a dysfunctional credit system that is holding back any chance of recovery.

“It is time for the president to state the obvious: This recession is not caused by excessive executive compensation in government-controlled companies. The economy has been sinking because of a lack of credit, stemming from a general lack of confidence, stemming from the lack of a plan to detoxify the major lending institutions, mainly the banks, which, to paraphrase Willie Sutton, is where the money used to be.

“That bill, we now discover, contains, among other depth charges, a Teamster-supported provision inserted by Sen. Byron Dorgan that terminates a Bush-era demonstration project to allow some Mexican trucks onto American highways, as required under NAFTA.

“If you thought the AIG hysteria was a display of populist cynicism directed at a relative triviality, consider this: There are more than 6.5 million trucks in the United States. The program Congress terminated allowed 97 Mexican trucks to roam among them. Ninety-seven! Shutting them out not only undermines NAFTA. It caused Mexico to retaliate with tariffs on 90 goods affecting $2.4 billion in U.S. trade coming out of 40 states.

“The very last thing we need now is American protectionism. It is guaranteed to start a world trade war. A deeply wounded world economy needs two things to recover: (1) vigorous U.S. government action to loosen credit by detoxifying the zombie banks and insolvent insurers, and (2) avoidance of a trade war.

“Free trade is the one area where the world indisputably turns to Washington for leadership. What does it see? Grandstanding, parochialism, petty payoffs to truckers and a rush to mindless populism. Over what? Over 97 Mexican trucks -- and bonus money that comes to what the Yankees are paying for CC Sabathia's left arm.”

On the other hand I found another column by that other spokesperson of the Right, George Will, writing in the Washington Post of March 24, 2009, which I thought was so unfair and so misleading that I want to quote it in order to respond to it. For that purpose I will set forth each paragraph of Will’s piece and immediately following set forth my rebuttel in italics:
Will writes:

“With the braying of 328 yahoos -- members of the House of Representatives who voted for retroactive and punitive use of the tax code to confiscate the legal earnings of a small, unpopular group -- still reverberating, the Obama administration yesterday invited private-sector investors to become business partners with the capricious and increasingly anti-constitutional government. This latest plan to unfreeze the financial system came almost half a year after Congress shoveled $700 billion into the Troubled Assets Relief Program, $325 billion of which has been spent without purchasing any toxic assets.”

Aside from the rather indecorous language, of “braying of 328 yahoos” this is clearly intended as an attack on Democrats, but neglects to mention that Republicans voted for it in numbers which fell only two votes short of a majority. Compare that to their unanimous vote against the stimulus bill, which was actually likely to jump-start the economy. Similarly, the $325 billion, which has been spent without purchasing any toxic assets, was spent by the Bush Administration.

"TARP funds have, however, semi-purchased, among many other things, two automobile companies (and, last week, some of their parts suppliers), which must amaze Sweden. That unlikely tutor of America regarding capitalist common sense has said, through a Cabinet minister, that the ailing Saab automobile company is on its own: "The Swedish state is not prepared to own car factories."

Semi purchased is a strange term. If Mr. Will means to say that a relatively small amount of money has been used to keep the American Auto industry afloat, while an evaluation is made as whether they can sustain themselves in the long run, he should say so, and what Sweden or any other country does to meet its own exigencies is rather besides the point.

“Another embarrassing auditor of American misgovernment is China, whose premier has rightly noted the unsustainable trajectory of America's high-consumption, low-savings economy. He has also decorously but clearly expressed sensible fears that his country's $1 trillion-plus of dollar-denominated assets might be devalued by America choosing, as banana republics have done, to use inflation for partial repudiation of improvidently incurred debts.”

The admiration that is suddenly being heaped on communist China is amazing. China is playing a little game of one-upmanship, knowing full well that inflation is not a threat in the US now or for the foreseeable future. Rather there is a liquidity crisis and the Fed, which is independent of the Administration, is pumping money into the economy to offset what has become a shortage of money. In the meantime China is continuing to invest in American dollars.

“From Mexico, America is receiving needed instruction about fundamental rights and the rule of law. A leading Democrat trying to abolish the right of workers to secret ballots in unionization elections is California's Rep. George Miller who, with 15 other Democrats, in 2001 admonished Mexico: "The secret ballot is absolutely necessary in order to ensure that workers are not intimidated into voting for a union they might not otherwise choose." Last year, Mexico's highest court unanimously affirmed for Mexicans the right that Democrats want to strip from Americans.”

A forced parallel between the Mexican anti-union stance, and an American bill intended to make it easier to unionize. While I personally have doubts about the wisdom of this bill, it provides for a union only if a majority of workers choose to join a union. The purpose of the bill is to keep workers from being intimidated into voting against a union.

“Congress, with the approval of a president who has waxed censorious about his predecessor's imperious unilateralism in dealing with other nations, has shredded the North American Free Trade Agreement. Congress used the omnibus spending bill to abolish a program that was created as part of a protracted U.S. stall regarding compliance with its obligation to allow Mexican long-haul trucks on U.S. roads. The program, testing the safety of Mexican trucking, became an embarrassment because it found Mexican trucking at least as safe as U.S. trucking. Mexico has resorted to protectionism -- tariffs on many U.S. goods -- in retaliation for Democrats' protection of the Teamsters union.”

As I have indicated that is an unfortunate instance of Congress caving in to union protectionist sentiment but to claim that it was done with the approval of the President is stretching the truth to say the least.

“NAFTA, like all treaties, is the "supreme law of the land." So says the Constitution. It is, however, a cobweb constraint on a Congress that, ignoring the document's unambiguous stipulations that the House shall be composed of members chosen "by the people of the several states," is voting to pretend that the District of Columbia is a state. Hence it supposedly can have a Democratic member of the House and, down the descending road, two Democratic senators. Congress rationalizes this anti-constitutional willfulness by citing the Constitution's language that each house shall be the judge of the "qualifications" of its members and that Congress can "exercise exclusive legislation" over the District. What, then, prevents Congress from giving House and Senate seats to Yellowstone National Park, over which Congress exercises exclusive legislation? Only Congress's capacity for embarrassment. So, not much.”

Mr. Will conveniently forgets to mention that this bill also gives an extra vote to Utah, which if it is entitled to another seat in the House aught to be done by apportionment, but apparently, since this would be a Republican seat Will fails to criticize it. Personally, it seems to me that Congress is going about this the wrong way. Under Art. 4, Sect. 3, Par. 1. of the Constitution, new States may be admitted by the Congress into the Union. This it would seem would not encounter constitutional obstacles, and would give the District exactly what Will fears, i.e. 2 Senators and a Representative in the House. Sounds good to me!

“The Federal Reserve, by long practice rather than law, has been insulated from politics in performing its fundamental function of preserving the currency as a store of value -- preventing inflation. Now, however, by undertaking hitherto uncontemplated functions, it has become an appendage of the executive branch. The coming costs, in political manipulation of the money supply, of this forfeiture of independence could be steep. Jefferson warned that "great innovations should not be forced on slender majorities." But Democrats, who trace their party's pedigree to Jefferson, are contemplating using "reconciliation" -- a legislative maneuver abused by both parties to severely truncate debate and limit the minority's right to resist -- to impose vast and controversial changes on the 17 percent of the economy that is health care. When the Congressional Budget Office announced that the president's budget underestimates by $2.3 trillion the likely deficits over the next decade, his budget director, Peter Orszag, said: All long-range budget forecasts are notoriously unreliable -- so rely on ours. This is but a partial list of recent lawlessness, situational constitutionalism and institutional derangement. Such political malfeasance is pertinent to the financial meltdown as the administration, desperately seeking confidence, tries to stabilize the economy by vastly enlarging government's role in it.”

What an incredible catchall filled with nonsense. The Fed is independent of the Administration not by practice but by law. The Chairman is appointed by the President for a fixed term and the present Chairman Bernanke, was appointed by George W. Bush. To the extent that the Fed is cooperating with the Treasury, it is because they feel that this is what is required by the present emergency.

As for the rest Mr. Will is outraged that his Republican friends may not be able to filibuster and obstruct all action to right the economy. They want the President to fail, and they will do whatever they can to make that happen and the American people be damned.

Has Mr. Will and his Republican cohorts already forgotten their cry before Democrats got the majority, “We want an up or down vote” and their threat to use the "nuclear option" to abolish the filibuster when it suited them. I would urge Democrats to keep the "nuclear option" in reserve. What is good for the goose is good for the gander and the times are too serious to allow a minority to block all legislative action that they don't like. Majority rule is fundamental to the functioning of a Democracy!!.
As for the budget being out of balance, something I didn’t hear about from Mr. Will or any Republicans during eight years of Republican misrule and ever increasing deficits, without investments in our future, I will address that in a future separate commentary.