As the US national unemployment rate remains high at 9.5%, Senate Republicans are
persistently blocking the extension of expiring benefits for jobless
Americans. Their primary concern is, apparently, that it'll increase the deficit.
"The only
reason the unemployment extension hasn't passed is because Democrats
simply refuse to pass a bill that doesn't add to the debt," claimed
Mitch McConnell, the Senate's Republican leader.
But are
Republicans really concerned with the deficit, or is this just a
political ruse?
On Fox News Sunday, Jon Kyl, the second highest-ranking
Republican in the Senate, was quizzed about his party's commitment to
reducing the deficit. How, wondered the show's host, Chris Wallace, can
the GOP support extending the 10-year, $678bn (PS445bn) tax cuts for the
richest few while they continually block unemployment benefits by
invoking the nefarious consequences of a growing budget deficit?
"You
do need to offset the cost of increased spending, and that's what
Republicans object to," Kyl said. "But you should never have to offset
cost of a deliberate decision to reduce tax rates on Americans." In
short, he claimed budget shortfalls resulting from tax cuts don't need
to be offset, but spending provisions do.
If you thought
this was a slip-up or a lone viewpoint you'd be wrong. "That's been the
majority Republican view for some time," McConnell told Talking Points Memo's
Brian Beutler, trotting out the verifiably false claim
that the 2001 Bush tax cuts didn't decrease tax revenues. "I think what
Senator Kyl was expressing was the view of virtually every Republican
on that subject." (As well as Democrat Ben Nelson.)
Ponder that for a minute.
The official Republican stance is that taxes aren't relevant to budget
problems, but spending is. In this case, $35bn for the jobless (during
the worst economic crisis since the great depression) is unacceptable to
them because it would bust the budget, but $678bn in breaks for the
wealthiest is fine.
This is the party that has been
viciously hammering President Obama and Democrats on the deficit over
the last year and a half, and has invoked it to filibuster legislation
after legislation on all sorts of issues (even on bills that the
nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says will cut the deficit, such
as healthcare reform).
But
the contrast between opposing relatively minor spending to shield the
suffering of the unemployed while backing tax cuts for the rich takes
this double standard to new levels. Especially when the tax breaks are projected
to massively decrease government revenues.
What this
suggests is that for Republicans, the deficit isn't a real concern -
it's simply a political weapon. A cynical, clever tool that serves to
weaken Obama's credibility as well as obstruct the Democrats'
legislative ambitions. Whatever Republicans believe in their hearts,
they know it's politically beneficial to prolong the suffering of the
unemployed ahead of November's midterm elections - because, perverse as
it may be in this situation, it'll wind up being a referendum on
Democratic governance.
Textbook economics say it's prudent
to boost domestic spending while running a deficit during major
recessions - it shields the fall in consumer spending, which otherwise
leads to a downward spiral of reduced investment, income, and ultimately
jobs. Unemployment benefits are ground zero in this cycle, because they
cushion the free-fall in demand while jobs are scarce. Extending these
benefits would do more to augment short-term business confidence than
pinching pennies to reduce the deficit during a downturn.
Either
way, Republican tactics are working like a charm. Democrats have given up on
further stimulus due to the harsh political climate and the sharp rise
in deficit fears among the elite class (though certainly not among the
public, which deems jobs far more important). For this, they'll
pay a heavy price.
And the GOP will probably get away with
it because, despite the amazing lack of evidence, it's simply a truism in
the US media that Republicans care about the deficit while Democrats
are fiscally reckless. Those who believe this may want to compare, for
instance, the budget
surpluses of the Clinton years (after he increased taxes), with the
exploding deficits of the Bush years (after he cut taxes).
It's
fine and fair for Republicans to stand on large tax cuts for the rich
as a principle. But they can't do so while claiming to care a whit about
the deficit. The budget is a result of money coming in (tax revenues) and
money going out (spending). They can't disregard 50% of this equation
and claim to be concerned with the outcome. Or at least be taken
seriously while they're at it.
