GOP Congressmen Do The Sensible Thing, Oppose Obama Economic Package

January 28th, 2009 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

It was reported Wednesday that Republican members of the House of Representatives are planning to vote against the economic stimulus package as it stands. They argue that Democrats have attacked too much pork to the bill and they rightfully argue much planned spending will not ’stimulate’ the economy at all.

Conservative blogggers, columnists and activists have argued for months now that Republicans should do everything in their power to oppose stimulus packages and bailouts. Supporting them, the reasoning goes, would connect Republicans to bills that are not going to work and that are opposed by a firm majority of Americans. Furthermore, Americans want Republicans to support small government and to be fiscal responsible. When they behave like Democrats, well, voters have no reason to vote Republican.

These opinion makers are correct. Supporting bailouts and stimulus packages will hurt the GOP in the long run. It will, insteasd, enable Democrats to take control both the White House and Congress for decades. Republicans will be accused of being `Democratic Light` at best. Democrats will monopolize elections.

But there are more reasons for the GOP to oppose Democratic economic stimulus plans than politics. The plan will, quite simply, accomplish nothing. It may, at best, revive the economy artificially, once again resulting in a major boom which explode several years later. The CBO affirmed this earlier this week by arguing that the plans could have a minor positive impact in the long run but would accomplish nothing in the short to middle long term. And thatś the best case scenario. Indeed, it is likely that the ’stimulus package’ will stall a revival for months even years. Not doing anything is considered better by many than doing what Pelosi, Reid and Obama have agreed upon.

Supporting the stimulus plan isn’t merely bad politics, it’s bad policy. The bank bailout was necessary because these banks would take the entire economy with them if they’d fall. And the fall wouldn’t come slowly, so people could adapt to it, but it would come suddenly, throwing society into chaos.

The intention of the bailout was not – and this has to be repeated time and again – to prevent a recession from occuring. Nor was it to artificially boost the economy to new heights. Rather, it was to prevent a sudden collapse. A recession would come, people would lose their jobs, companies would be forced to reform (and some would go out of business). These changes were and are necessary. The U.S. Economy isn’t in trouble because it’s so strong and healthy, it has collapsed because it is weak, unhealthy and sensitive. It has to be rid of its weak elements before it can become as strong as it once was – and stronger.

Republicans have to explain the above to Americans. They have to make clear why they can’t support the plan, and why they believe it’s a bad plan for America. Americans are always open to fiscal responsible and fiscal conservative arguments. Communicating these arguments with the people is what Republicans have to focus on right now; they can spend less time in the U.S. Senate and Congress and more before cameras, with print and online journalists, bloggers and simply out on the street, in neighborhoods, villages and cities to explain their views and choices. Voters are more rational than often assumed, Republican have to keep this in mind and act accordingly.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Jim Sherman
    February 11th, 2009 at 00:17
    Reply | Quote | #1

    The GOP is being acused of being obstuctionist, maybe it is time the GOP should step back and abstain from voting on the stimulus package.
    I believe it is going to be shoved down our throts anyway so by abstaining it is layed a the Obama door step

  2. C Stanley
    February 11th, 2009 at 00:21
    Reply | Quote | #2

    Yes, that’s probably a good idea, Jim- they should all vote “present”. At the pressers afterward, they can explain that they aren’t obstructing, since obviously the Democrats wanted to pass this and they have plenty of votes, so they can do so.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.