« From His Cold, Dead, Hands | Main | When Pundits (Dis)Agree »
June 19, 2006
A New Direction?
So the Democrats have released 2006's iteration of the "Contract With America" and, lo and behold, it's pretty good. Not visionary, or bold, or different, to be sure. But it does what it's supposed to do: offer a broadly supportable agenda in bullet-point format.
Democrats offer a New Direction, putting the common good of all Americans first for a change and will:
Make Health Care More Affordable: Fix the prescription drug program by putting people ahead of drug companies and HMO's, eliminating wasteful subsidies, negotiating lower drug prices and ensuring the program works for all seniors; invest in stem cell and other medical research.
Lower Gas Prices and Achieve Energy Independence: Crack down on price gouging; eliminate billions in subsidies for oil and gas companies and use the savings to provide consumer relief and develop American alternatives, including biofuels; promote energy efficient technology.
Help Working Families: Raise the minimum wage; repeal tax giveaways that encourage companies to move jobs overseas.
Cut College Costs: Make college tuition deductible from taxes; expand Pell grants and slash student loan costs.
Ensure Dignified Retirement: Prevent the privatization of Social Security; expand savings incentives; and ensure pension fairness.
Require Fiscal Responsibility: Restore the budget discipline of the 1990s that helped eliminate deficits and spur record economic growth.
That's a -- whaddayacallit? -- an agenda right there. And it's a good one. The Medicare proposals are obvious and important, the college portions are worthwhile (though there's some revenue loss that'll needs to be offset), the fiscal responsibility stuff implies PAYGO without promising it, and you've of course got a minimum wage increase. I'm surprised that there's nothing about corruption, and apparently nobody could decide on an Iraq plank, but this is better than I expected.
June 19, 2006 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c572d53ef00d83499aa7253ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference A New Direction?:
Comments
Ah, the bigotry of low expectations. (LOL)
Yeah, it probably could be worse. Like most shopping lists, it doesn't contain some important items that have to be recalled when pushing the basket down the isles of the supermarket (like, where's the beef?):
- fixing the health insurance problem for those uninsured? (Can't say the words 'universal health care!)
- funding support for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid?
- a fairer field for union organizing?
- fixing the growing inequality of incomes and taxation (particularly corporate taxation)?
- (very quietly: oversight of the executive branch; restoration of separation and balance of powers between Exec., Leg. and Judicial branches; lobbying reform, etc.?
- International relations? The War? War Powers?
Posted by: JimPortlandOR | Jun 19, 2006 12:46:12 PM
Normally I think you're pretty on the ball, Ezra, but I have to disagree with you here. This plan is awful. It's boring, tame, and gives no red meat to the base in an off-year election.
Stop price gouging on gas prices? Is that even a problem? Nothing is going to get done about gas prices, so why make the promise? And are tax giveaways the reason companies move jobs overseas? I thought it was because they could get the same work on the cheap. And making tuition deductible from taxes? Great idea! Except that it's already been done. I did it last year, in fact, and got a huge credit for my wife's tuition costs. And how are we going to restore fiscal balance without undoing the Bush tax cuts? Cut even more social programs?
So what about universal health coverage for every American? What about curbing and investigating executive abuse of power? What about ensuring the right to privacy and choice for all Americans? I don't see any promises on terrorism or foreign relations with Iran, N. Korea, etc. What about honesty, fairness, and ending corruption and the K Street Project?
And finally, the plan is called a "New Direction" which implicitly stands in opposition to "staying the course." Yet, staying the course seems to be precisely the Democratic plan for Iraq. There are certainly no alternatives offered. Couldn't they at least promise to conduct the rebuilding of Iraq with competency, expediency, and efficiency?
This "plan" is terrible (and unfortunately typical) weak brew from the Democrats. It doesn't make me want to go out and vote at all. Or give them money. It's all focus group-tested, centrist garbage that energizes no one except maybe the odd policy wonk.
Posted by: sohei | Jun 19, 2006 1:38:09 PM
The silver-bullit against "The Culture Of Corruption", publicly financed elections, is missing. Public financing in politics should be the equivalant for the Contract With America's term-limits, in my view.
But they're probably scared for the GOP Hate Machine calling it "socialism". I wish they'd be a little more bold, maybe just one big bold proposal amongst the other smaller ones. Make HealthCare and College-tuition more affordable? Universal single-payer healthcare and a push to make education a free and universal right, not a privilege.
Posted by: Hustveit | Jun 19, 2006 1:45:07 PM
Yes, this is pretty poor. If you listen to the Republicans, they're also for affordable health care, energy independence, helping working families, dignified retirement, and fiscal responsibility -- they just want to do these things through Health Savings Accounts, ANWR drilling, tax cuts, privitizing Social Security, and cutting earmarks. Now while their solutions range from ineffectual to downright harmful, the race has now been framed as a policy debate, which is both boring and not always won by the side with the best ideas.
Most of the original Contract for America was arcane legislative rules to "fix" Congress. The entire vibe was throw the bums out. Why has corruption been dropped from the Democratic plan?
Posted by: Craig | Jun 19, 2006 1:49:01 PM
"New" direction? Sounds a lot like '04 to me.
Posted by: Blar | Jun 19, 2006 2:13:18 PM
...Paul Krugman, via Mark Thoma.
Posted by: bob mcmanus | Jun 19, 2006 2:15:20 PM
I have to agree that the new agenda sounds weak....a less feeble attempt than prior years but not making people shake in their boots. And, uh, lower gas prices will never encourage Americans to find or fund alternative fuels...we need to bring the prices of the alternative energies down, if possible.
Posted by: Steve Mudge | Jun 19, 2006 2:44:44 PM
I read it and did not see the word "Iraq" or "war" anywhere on the document. The most important issue today and they are silent. Also, there is no mention of marriage or the word "gay" so they aren't standing up for them either.
Either they don't care or don't have the cajones to say what they think. If the latter is the case, then they know their ideas are so unpopular that they will hinder them instead of helping them and they are willing to be dishonest with the voters for power......
Posted by: Fred Jones. | Jun 19, 2006 5:10:14 PM
The Triangulating B.... Grover Cleveland ...Brad Delong on Paul Krugman's call for a two-sided class war:
"Perhaps not: I've always thought Gilded Age America would have been a better place had the Eugene Debs-led Pullman strike succeeded. I've always been on the side of John Peter Altgeld and Clarence Darrow and Jane Addams." ...Brad Delong. In comments Anne quote a review of a new bildungsroman of Jane Addams
The Gilded Age and Progressive movement and that great American, Eugene Debs, could be a model and source of inspiration. However, with the forthcoming loss of a stupid war and the economic crash, we could also look to slightly more recent times and colder climes for style of leadership:
Where is our Finland Station.
Posted by: bob mcmanus | Jun 19, 2006 5:33:50 PM
This is pablum. This is bullshit. This is the kind of excrement generated by spinless, ball-less "consultants" who inexplicably continue to get hired despite never winning anything.
Where's the call for universal health care? Tinkering around the edges just doesn't cut it any more. Where's the call for workplace rights, higher wages, and stronger unions?
Where's the specific, concrete proposals that will benefit the average American?
Fuck the wonks; we need some goddamn demagogues. Bring back Huey Long.
Posted by: Firebug | Jun 19, 2006 9:04:03 PM
Immigration and Political polarization ...More Krugman on class war via Thoma, this time with neat charts
"And there's a strong correlation between the foreign-born share of the population and political polarization, visible in the charts at the Web address above.
This political effect of immigration, much more than the effect on wages, is the reason I'm less enthusiastic about immigration than many liberals; I fear that immigration undermines the political foundations for a decent social safety net." ...PK
Posted by: bob mcmanus | Jun 19, 2006 9:08:35 PM
Hey, whatever happened to the idea to federalize student loans, so that they're payable as an extra few percent on your income tax? The point being, if you're going into a low-wage sector after school, like education or health care or public policy, you aren't crushed by loan payments. How much and how fast you pay is directly tied to how much you earn. Did Feinstein kill this? I have a vague memory of her carrying some water for the banks on the issue... She's such a darling. Feh. If only California had Texas's right to split into multiple states anytime it chose to...
Posted by: tatere | Jun 20, 2006 4:26:44 AM
Huh. If anybody made a list of the things that needed to be fixed after the Repugs fucked them up nobody would have time to worry about a platform, agenda or anything else except working one's tail off.
Posted by: opit | Jun 20, 2006 4:55:41 AM
This 'iniative' is not what needs to be changed. or what they they believe. It's what they want to tell the public in order to obtain power and little else.
It's an attempt to snow the public. Again, they give little respect to the voting public believeing that they can lie and tell them what they think they want to hear.
Posted by: Fred Jones | Jun 20, 2006 8:53:49 AM
Lowering gas prices, while it has populist appeal, it NOT a good policy prescription. We need high gas prices to depress demand and provide a price umbrella for alternatives.
Posted by: chloe | Jun 20, 2006 11:29:06 PM
Well chloe, how to reconcile that the high gas prices punish the poor and working poor terribly while it hardly affects the rich?
You are starting to sound like an economist...and a Republican at that. Thinking long term for the good of the whole will not win you any brownie points here on this board.
Posted by: Fred Jones | Jun 21, 2006 9:00:26 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.
