|
|||
|
Underwhelmer of the HousePosted on Jan 6, 2011By Ruth Marcus Nancy Pelosi spoke of combating climate change, ensuring college affordability, expanding access to health care, ending the war in Iraq. Newt Gingrich envisioned a balanced budget amendment, welfare reform, tax cuts, deregulation, term limits. John Boehner promised ... well, not very much. The 112th Congress, he said, will not “kick the can” or “fall short.” It will be “the people’s House,” a place where “we can disagree without being disagreeable to each other.” There will be an end to “business as usual.” And, oh yes, “honest debate and a fair, open process.” If you programmed a computer to generate a speech laden with cliches, solemnly vowing to achieve the unobjectionable and all but devoid of substance, it would have come up with something approximating Boehner’s remarks. A new House speaker’s remarks upon taking the gavel may be the ultimate in little-noted nor long-remembered speeches. Certainly, Boehner isn’t the first incoming speaker to peddle platitudes; these speeches are the appropriate moment for airy promises of bipartisanship. Humility never hurts. So perhaps saying almost nothing—and nothing that can come back to haunt you—is smart politics. Perhaps, but I was underwhelmed. I’d probably disagree with much of Boehner’s agenda, but I would have preferred at least to have him share it. Listen to the Gingrich 1995 speech and you hear his restless intelligence and visionary conservatism. Listen to Pelosi’s from 2007, and you know the substance of what she wants to get done. Listen to Boehner’s, and you hear a lot about changing House rules: three days to read bills, smaller committees, a new openness to letting the minority offer amendments during floor debate. Advertisement Since the closest Boehner edged to substance in Wednesday’s speech involved House rules, let’s focus on one specific change he mentioned. “Old rules that have made it easy to increase spending,” the new speaker said, “will be replaced by new reforms that make it easier to cut spending.” Not exactly. The previous pay-as-you-go rule required lawmakers to find a spending cut or new revenue to finance any cut in taxes or increase in mandatory spending. (Such as, for example, the Medicare prescription drug bill that the previous Republican majority passed without paying for.) The new, Republican pay-go rule only requires that spending increases be paid for—and then only with a spending cut. Tax cuts can whiz through the new House. In short, the Republican version of pay-go makes deficit spending much easier than it was before. “Hard work and tough decisions will be required of the 112th Congress,” Boehner said. Yes, and removing a speed bump in the way of higher deficits isn’t a promising way to begin. Ruth Marcus’ e-mail address is marcusr(at symbol)washpost.com. © 2011, Washington Post Writers Group Previous item: The House of Professors Next item: The GOP Is Holding the Economy Hostage, and It's Time to Call Its Bluff New and Improved CommentsWe are launching a major overhaul of our comments section. In addition to more robust spam filtering and moderation, new features include the ability to rate other comments, sort how they are displayed and respond directly via e-mail or in a thread. Unfortunately, commenters will lose their existing Truthdig identities. It's a pain, we know, but on the plus side you will now be able to log in with a plethora of options, including Google, Twitter, Facebook and Disqus accounts. Before launching this system we spent months in discussion with our top commenters. We listened to the feedback and we hope you like what we've come up with. Please direct any problems or concerns to us via our contact page. |
By skimohawk, January 9, 2011 at 9:41 pm Link to this comment
the previous poster asks:
“Is this generation capable of doing what previous generations needed to do?”
The previous generation got us out of Vietnam, got us a Clean Air Act, and a Clean Water Act.
The current generation is too busy playing “WII” and text-messaging their new Facebook friend… exactly as designed.
Report thisBy aacme88, January 9, 2011 at 9:09 pm Link to this comment
Has it occurred to anyone that he just doesn’t have anything to say? Republican politicians in the twenty-first century are empty suits, place holders. Fox, Lindbaugh, etc do their talking for them. Wall Street, Exxon, the Koch brothers, and Murdoch do their thinking.
Report thisThe only thing they have left to do is push the Nay button, for the last few years, now the Yea button.
By DHFabian, January 9, 2011 at 1:27 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Think about it. We’ve seen a stunning deterioration in the quality of life in the US over the past 30 years as decades of social progress have been wiped out. After just 15 years, and as a result of our “popular welfare reform,” the infant mortality rate among America’s poor now actually exceeds that of most Third World countries while the life expectancy of our poor has fallen below that of all the modern nations. This is an extraordinary development because it is not the result of war or massive natural disaster, but of simple public apathy. (To put this into economic perspective, note that we are spending roughly 50% of our federal budget on the military today; AFDC used a mere 6% of the federal budget at its highest, back in the late 1970s.)
We’ve been marching backwards in time, increasingly becoming more like a feudal society. We know it’s wrong, and we hate it. What are we doing about it? I guess those who are better off, have flexible vacation time and a few hundred dollars of disposable cash might get together for a political event this summer, assuming the organizers get a permit, and the participants behave themselves—maybe a rally in DC or NY, with a band or two, and a 10 minute intermission to “seriously address” the cause(s). Wish I could join in, but like millions of us, I can’t afford it.
As long as Americans behave, they will continue to be ignored by those in power, no matter how many petitions are signed. “Remember to get your permit, remain within the designated protest zone, and don’t bother anyone; get it out of your system, and then go home.” It’ll take actions as strong, united and certain as the labor strikes of the ‘30s and the Poor People’s March of the ‘60s. It’ll require a statement that is loud enough for DC (and the media) to hear, and too loud to ignore. It’ll take the same united, hit-the-streets efforts seen in previous times of great crisis—including the jobless, the disenfranchised— to prevent the US from becoming totalitarian state. It took only 30 yrs to reach this terrible point, and it should take less than 30 years to complete the process, becoming a totalitarian state. All it takes is our silence and failure to get off our butts.
Is this generation capable of doing what previous generations needed to do?
Report thisBy emaho, January 8, 2011 at 7:39 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
In the Nov 20 Roling Stone, Matt Taibbi does a superb job of dissecting The Boner. A great piece. I wish Matt was my representative in this “government”.
Report thisBy ray, January 7, 2011 at 9:11 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
Boehner- wanted- dead or alive.
Report thisAt this point- better dead!
By godistwaddle, January 7, 2011 at 5:55 am Link to this comment
Yeah, but he’s got a pretty golf swing, keeps the
Report thistobacco and bourbon industries flourishing (as well as
some egregious skin coloring firm) and will protect the
super-rich from the depredations of the poor. He’s
All-American.