As many of you know, I’m one of the reportedly 13 million on the mailing list of Organizing For Against America. So once in awhile I have to have some fun with what they say and the occasion of Scott Brown’s win in heretofore reliably liberal Massachusetts is one of those times. Mitch Stewart of the group had this to say:
Yesterday’s disappointing election results show deep discontent with the pace of change. I know the OFA community and the President share that frustration.
We also saw what we knew to be true all along: Any change worth making is hard and will be fought at every turn. While it doesn’t take away the sting of this loss, there is no road to real change without setbacks along the way.
We could have simply sought to do things that were easy, that wouldn’t stir up controversy. But changes that aren’t controversial rarely solve the problem.
Our country continues to face the same fundamental challenges it faced yesterday. Our health care system still needs reform. Wall Street still needs to be held accountable. We still need to create good jobs. And we still need to continue building a clean energy economy.
The President isn’t walking away from these challenges. In fact, his determination and resolve are only stronger. We must match that commitment with our own.
But it won’t be easy. Real change never is. For that reason, I am grateful you’re part of this fight with us.
First off, I wasn’t disappointed with the results at all, and the only discontent with the pace of change was that it was going too fast in the wrong direction!
Reread paragraph number four. First of all, I disagree completely with the premise that our “health care system still needs reform.” What needs reform is the manner it’s paid for – the delivery of the system is quite good. Opening up the system within each state to competition so there’s more than a handful of providers and cutting out some of the frivolous mandates to promote more accessible basic coverage would be a start and not run into the thousands of pages. Eliminating the linkage between work and health insurance makes obvious sense, too. And there’s no need for a coverage mandate – I know Scott Brown voted for the Massachusetts system and that’s one place where he and I disagree.
And then we have Wall Street. The populists in Washington have come out against what they term “excessive” bonuses and pay for Wall Street firms. Yet Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac executives receive similar compensation packages without nearly the outcry.
I look at the situation this way. If you don’t like what an executive is making, don’t do business with the firm – use a local bank or investment company whose compensation structure is more in line with what you believe is fair. I hold no grudge on executive pay because there are few executives who have exhibited the talent and drive necessary to rise to the top of the corporate ladder, and they are being compensated for doing so. There might be 10,000 employees at a Wall Street firm, but only one guy is in charge and obviously the board of directors made a deal in good faith with him or her to be their leader. By that same token, I happen to think the UAW contracts with the Big Three are excessive but it’s the fault of the companies for letting them become so and not telling the union to stuff it. So the problem can cut both ways.
Now let’s talk about how to “create good jobs.” How about keeping private sector money where it belongs – in the private sector? Thus far, much of the job creation from the stimulus is either busy work on roads and other infrastructure (some of which is duplicative, like milling and repaving a perfectly fine stretch of highway) or “saved” jobs in the public sector (which has a higher proportion of union jobs than the private sector), positions kept when states were bailed out of their budgetary misfortunes.
A far better route to creating good jobs would be to eliminate the uncertainty of whether onerous health care and environmental legislation will come to pass and lowering the tax burden on businesses. And while you’re at it, keep the Bush tax cuts in place. Let the areas of the economy which work best get back to work and slowly the remainder (particularly the building industry) will spring back into shape as well.
Finally, if we are to “build a clean energy economy,” we should do it without unfair subsidy or rentseeking multinational corporations trying to ace smaller competitors out of the “green” market. The market long ago decided that carbon-based energy was the way to go because it was inexpensive and reliable – that and we still have enough to meet our demand for decades to come, particularly when it comes to coal and natural gas. Renewable sources are nice, but expensive and frankly too unreliable to count on for large-scale use. If the wind doesn’t blow (or blows too hard, such as when a hurricane or tropical storm passes by) a wind turbine creates no power. But as long as we can dig or drill for coal or natural gas and transport it to where we need it – which we’ve accomplished for decades – those supplies are stable and reliable.
I have no idea if Scott Brown or any of his GOP cohorts will read this critique, but if they want to maintain the momentum that the 2009 elections in Virginia and New Jersey began and the Massachusetts win continued, they should take these words to heart. The problem with the statist agenda pushed by the author of this e-mail and endorsed by the current administration is that there’s no real mandate for it.
At its heart, America is a right-of-center country. When independents get a taste of a radically leftist agenda pushed on a national scale, they revolt – first at the local TEA Party, then in those political races which have garnered national attention. Scott Brown was a shoo-in once the Bay State’s race became the United States’ race because the “hope” and “change” promised a year ago wasn’t the variety of hope and change America truly wanted or needed.
Over the last year we’ve learned a painful lesson and all the spin in the world can’t change the fact that we want something better. November isn’t that far off, and graduates of the most recent economic School of Hard Knocks will be doing their own grading at the ballot box.
Something tells me the statist agenda will get a big, fat, red “F.”