Does McCain Still Agree with Reagan that Government is the Problem?

Ronald Reagan, in his first inaugural address, famously declared that "government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."

Twenty-seven years later, in the midst of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, and seven-plus years into the reign of Bush and Cheney, Reagan's anti-government battle cry should be on trial. But, stunningly, it is not.

This needs to change. The presidential candidates' view of the role of government should be one of the central questions of the last 36 days of the campaign. And it should definitely be a question they are asked at their next debate:

"Sen. McCain, given the part deregulation played in the current economic crisis and your support of a massive government bailout of the financial industry, are you now ready to break with Ronald Reagan's assessment?"

And, to be even handed: "Sen. Obama, in 1996, Bill Clinton cheerfully announced that 'the era of big government is over.' As the Dow plummets and Wall Street and Main Street turn to Washington for big government bailouts, are you now ready to break with President Clinton's assessment?"

The shift in my own thinking on the role of government was what led to my disillusionment with the Republican Party, and the transformation in my political views. I've always been progressive on social issues: pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-gay rights -- even when I was a Republican. The big difference is that I once believed the private sector would address America's social problems. But the hope that people would roll up their sleeves and solve this country's social ills without the help of government was never fully realized. There were never enough volunteers or donations -- and the problems were just too massive and intractable to tackle without the raw power of appropriations that only government can provide.

Our economy is not the only thing that is crumbling. So is the philosophical foundation of the modern Republican Party -- also known as the Leave Us Alone Coalition, led by its spiritual guru, Grover Norquist. His dream of making government so small "we can drown it in a bathtub" has been embraced by the GOP mainstream.

Indeed, during his 2003 inauguration, Jeb Bush stood in front of Florida's capitol building and said: "there would be no greater tribute to our maturity as a society than if we can make these buildings around us empty of workers; silent monuments to the time when government played a larger role than it deserved or could adequately fill."

I sadly suspect that Jeb and Grover and their Republican compatriots have not yet updated their views of government -- they have not yet made the connection between demonizing government and looking to it to save the day.

The financial meltdown has put the Grand Old Party's schizophrenia on full display. But why are so many in the media, the Democratic Party, and the Obama campaign averting their eyes from the spectacle of a party that wants to drown government until they need it to bail out Wall Street or AIG -- that wants to vanquish government workers, unless they are listening in on our phone conversations or working hard rolling back government regulations?

It's like the story, probably apocryphal, of the agitated -- and obviously confused -- senior citizen imploring a GOP politician not to "let the government get its hands on Medicare."

With the madness of this contradictory mindset exposed, voters will have a chance to decide if they agree with Norquist and Jeb and W and Cheney and the Republican Messiah himself, Ronald Reagan and, yes, with John McCain. And even Cindy McCain who, in her otherwise bland convention speech, called for "the Federal government" to "get itself under control and out of our way."

A staggering 83 percent of Americans believe that we are heading in the wrong direction. And, I'm sorry, Sen. McCain, I don't think it's because of too many earmarks or because $3 million was spent in 2003 to study bear DNA in Montana.

Size matters in some things, but when it comes to government, it's not the size of the government, it's the way it is utilized.

"Big government" didn't get us into Iraq. It didn't spy on Americans or open black op rendition facilities all over the world. "Big government" didn't create Guantanamo or okay the use of torture. "Big government" didn't leave the residents of New Orleans to suffer in the wake of Katrina. "Big government" didn't cause the financial industry to run off the rails. Indeed, the free market is what created all the new, risky ways for banks to game the system and, eventually, implode -- then come calling on "big government" to ride to the rescue.

So let's hear what McCain and Obama think the fundamental role of government should be. I can think of no better way to underline the massive gulf between the two candidates -- and the two parties they represent -- at the very moment when McCain is so desperately trying to blur the differences (see his recent shopping spree at the second-hand populism store: "Big discounts on 'fat cats' and 'Wall Street greed'!")

Stanford professor Lawrence Lessig says that if Americans recognize that the financial crisis -- and the need for a government bailout -- is due to "policies McCain still promotes... this could well be the event that effected a generational shift in governmental attitudes. Think Hoover vs. (the eventual) FDR."

But if we want to make sure that Americans make that connection, we need to put the question of the role of government front and center in the campaign. Economic policy and foreign policy and domestic policy are all important areas of debate. But before we continue looking at the (falling) trees, let's take a step back and consider the forest.

For those of you in the Pennsylvania area, on Monday I'll be debating Mike Huckabee in Hershey, Pennsylvania. For more information, click here.

Follow Arianna Huffington on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ariannahuff

Comments

[ItHasToGetBetter]

It's the lack of government involvement that got us into this. "Free Market" people can't be left to their own devices. Their policies show a callousness and selfishness toward the effect that their dealings have on others. They have proven themselves to be soulless, greedy people and we need to stop helping them continue unabated. Something that I've not heard people mention-if businesses were doing what they were supposed to do to begin with (ie. provide decent working conditions, decent wages and hours, keep pollutants from poisoning people, make safe modes of transportation, make honest loans, etc.), regulations wouldn't need to be legislated. As had been seen, when a dollar is involved, "so what if people die needlessly or are thrown in the poorhouse, as long as it's not me, I don't care" is what they say. They'll always be able to afford the best of everything. No matter how mediocre they are as human beings. That's why the rest of us need to be protected from them. They're sociopaths.

[Pulladigm]

Mr. McCain talks about reducing government. He talks about freezing government spending. Of course he won't freeze the pentagon budget, the largest expenditure of the budget. So what will he freeze? In the face of a shrinking economy where unemployment will, likely grow to double digits, crime will grow as it always does in hard economic times, where more people will be forced out of their homes, where stress and poverty will cause greater strain on peoples health and the healthcare system. Well, we can freeze law enforcement cut the earmarks for the FBI, the DEA, the ATF, Etc. We can freeze Food Stamps. They can go hungry. If they get hungry enough they can go out and get one of those nonexistant jobs out there. We can cut back on the earmarkes for homeland security. FEMA doesn't work anyway and port security is a joke and airport security..­. well, with over 1,000,000 people on the terrorist watch list(including Sen. Ted Kennedy and Nelson Mandela) yet the only arrest was Cat Stevens(?)??!!??!
.

[pontiuspilate]

Most homeless people I know, don't want one of those non-existent jobs. They don't even want an "existent" job....mos­t don't want to work, mow a yard, throw a paper, deliver a pizza...th­ey just want to be left alone...ho­meless people don't go hungry..st­ats show they are some of the best fed people in America...
Come up with a real agenda, not your hidden one.

[relevancematters]

Most homeless people are mentally ill. Thank Reagan for putting them on the streets where you have to avoid them. Don't go on about bootstraps either--these are people who don't have any. And if you're a real good little Christian Republican, then consider this: they may represent a real test of your faith. I'd say you're failing that test right now.

[chrisclemens]

One of the problems with the "Conservatives", like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, is the fact they although they preach "smaller government" they do not act that way- and they rarely are called on this. Ronald Reagan increased government spending faster than any president in the modern era-rivaled only recently by George W. Bush. Both of these presidents increased the rate of total federal spending by 25% during their terms-even after adjusting for inflation. Additionally, about 2/3 of our current total national debt has been incurred during their administrations.
Bill Clinton, a democrat, increased federal spending and our national debt the least of any modern president.
So who are the fiscal conservatives??????
Unfortunately, I do not think many people are aware of this. I hope the Obama campaign can make them aware.

[Izadorra]

Cindy and John McCain have, themselves, been the recipients of benefits that come from less regulation on Wall street. How can anyone believe what he says? Check out the video put together that includes just a few of his contradictions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEtZlR3zp4c

[pandaemonia]

What is odd given the 83% result Arianna quoted above about the USA "heading in the wrong directiion" is that this morning the exact same percentage of respondents - 83% are against the bailout. This very paradox illuminates why there are no simple answers and no one group of people, politicians or professions is to blame for the current crisis.

[Eoin45]

There is no paradox there at all. Heading in the wrong direction is perfectly consistent with being against the bailout - it being an example of the current direction. No one group to blame? Baloney. It is mostly the de-regulation crowd who have been doing it since the Reagan era. Yes, some Democrats have had a hand but it's largely Republicans who are to blame.

[rustyaustin]

I guess, if you ignore the fact that the republicans have held the presidency for 20 of the last 28 years and the house for 12 of the last 14 years and the Senate for 5 of the last 7 years, then yeah, there is no one group of people or politicians or professions to blame, except republicans and bankers. If you ignore the fact that the economy experienced by far and by every measure the best 8 years of those 28 were under Clinton, a democrat, then yeah, I can't think of a single group of people or politicians to blame, except republicans and bankers.

[pandaemonia]

Government IS the problem but that does not mean it needs to stay this way. It can and should be the solution but we really need to vote out a bunch of incumbents - mainly those heading the powerful committees who failed to enforce the extant regulation so that it looks like the problem is "deregulation". It's not that simple. The regulations that were in place were not enforced - in fact - the Franksx, Waters and other Fannie/Freddie cheerleaders were so cozy with the companies' executives, nothing was done. We really need to minimize the amount of professional politicians and lawyers in elected seats - we need some people with actual business experience to come aboard but I suppose they'd have to be somewhat crazy to enter this bastion of inefficiency and hypocrisy for such a pay cut!

[ibsteve2u]

Unfortunately, the Republicans figured out that they themselves could make a surprising amount of money pretending that all Businessess are owned and staffed by honest people who are immune to human weaknesses like greed, sloth, envy, and lust and so are inherently self-regulating.

That perspective allows them to - in their minds - avoid moral responsibility for their actions. They tell themselves, you see, that they did not really DO anything - they only gave more FREEDOM to others.

The difficult task that they accepted when they decided to transform that fiction into law, of course, is twofold:

First, they must try to act surprised when they are proven wrong.

Secondly, they must persuade the American people that whatever catastrophe occurs is a "freak", a "fluke", an "exception", the "irresponsible actions of some" - as Bush put it - in order to prevent a return to common sense.

[totalliberal]

Regulations are the same as laws. Regulators, police. What society or monetary system can run without laws and police?

[cybertoothcat]

totalliberal said, "Regulations are the same as laws. Regulators, police. What society can run without laws and police?"

Well said, totalliberal, but the answer here is also GOOD government, not the type of government Republicans give us. Yesterday, the GOP was stuck down in the Ohio Supreme Court, I believe, trying to do away with same-day voter registration/ voting. They only want regulation to benefit themselves, not "Joe Six-Pack". At least in this case we avoided a bad decision as this law would have favored the Repubs and would have been unjust.
So we need good, functioning, caring government. Any laws won't do. Refer to infamous Supreme Court Decisions such as Dred Scott V. Sanford and Bush V. Gore. The first decision declared slaves property and the second one.....

[realistic2008]

The Incas, The Mayas, the Aztecs, the Romans, the Persians, the cave men, not necessarily in that order, have a good system, they cut the hands of the perpetrators if not kill them.

[Eoin45]

Yeah, great idea and so what if we chop off a few innocent hands accidently. As long as YOU'RE willing to forgo complaining if you're one of the ones innocently accused. I know you won't miss those hands as long as it's a good cause right?

[adaugeo]

It's TIME for 'The Party Is Over' Amendment:

1.Corporat­e Entities and their OFFICERS are PROHIBITED from CONTRIBUTING, directly or indirectly TO ANY CANDIDATES CAMPAIGN for public office.

Yes - The 3-Ring Circus under The BIG Top is the problem.

[Jazzbeau]

And breaking these laws must be felonies subject to prison time and existing 'three strikes' laws.

Too bad there's zero chance anything like this could ever get ratified as a constitutional amendment and no law along these lines would have any chance of getting past the current Supreme Court. I fear it would take civil disobedience greater than that of the sixties, or another thirties style depression, to bring about a change anything like this.

The other, and unfortunately most likely, outcome is that we keep drifting in more or less the same direction we are heading, drowning in foreign debt and dependent on foreign resources, until we become the worlds only banana republic with nuclear arms.

[watchingthings]

Actually folks...wh­at needs to change is the GOP taking the people and country seriously.­..this is something worth protecting­...instead of GOP playing games with the counmtry.

[kgkarl]

Well, it seems that the dangers of deregulation still aren't clear to some Republicans and financiers.

Those "conservative" thrill seekers are now arguing for suspension of "mark to market" accounting rules. Mark to market rules require banks to list their assets at market value. Banks hit hard by the current economic woes don't want to list their assets at market value (especially now that prices are falling) -- they prefer to list them at "fair" value .... i.e., imaginary values that they hope for in their dreams. If financial institutions don't have to carry their assets at market value, no one will know what they're really worth.

Credit has frozen up because banks are afraid to make loans, even to other banks, because in these currently unstable financial times lenders don't know who is on the verge of financial collapse and who is not.

Suspending the mark to market rules will encourage companies to overstate their assets in order to hide financial weakness. So it will make it HARDER for lenders to tell good borrowers from bad ones and, as a result, credit will TIGHTEN, rather than loosening up, and our economy will WORSEN rather than improve.

Yet Republicans, including Newt Gingrich (only semi-retired), are now once again screaming for deregulation: this time in the form of suspension of mark to market accounting rules. See http://newt.org/tabid/102/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/3755/Default.aspx. Some people never learn.

Let's hope America's voters are smarter than that.

[LuckyBlessed]

Unfortunately I think American voters are not. I have all my family, people I work with, and some friends who still are Die Hard Republicans. In part, I think Obama has done an awful job of combating the negative ads in Indiana, just using positive ads.

I am OUTRAGED, because I was in the middle of this train wreck waiting to happen listening to Repubs in board rooms. There are things seen and heard that many would want an attorney present if revealed. Mark to Market is probably one of them.

Perhaps someone else knows the specifics of accounting regs, but I believe that the "impairment" accounting regulations brought in when "run off" from massive refinancing was a problem was changed January 2007? This should have resulted in a large windfall on the books and in the pockets of such blessed executives.

[torrrep]

Yes government is the problem. How do you like your public schools? How do you like your public roads? How do you like your public savings (social security)? How do you like your public mail? How do you like your public hospitals? I could go on and on but my point is clear. There is NOTHING the federal government can do that can't be done better by private industry.

[Warmglobe]

It is funny how on one hand that none of us can find one thing that the goverment has done right but it is the first place many of us go gor "help". This latest "crisis" is yet another example of how why the government should stay out. Let those who gambled on this mess lose and lose badly. Let the free market hit the fat cats on Wall Street right in the face, just like it hits all of us.

[Eoin45]

I can find some things the government has done right: The GI bill for one. It enabled the U.S. at the end of WWII to develop a broad middle class and enjoy a decade of prosperity. Returning GIs were able to go to college and buy homes at reasonable prices. It was also a time of high union membership and high taxes on the rich and corporations - all more regulated by the government than they are now - and we were better off for it. Other examples: The now defunct Bureau of Standards, Medicare, which is far more effective in its allocation of funds than private insurers, NASA - when we put our minds to it we went to the moon. Since the advent of Lyndom Johnson's Great Society, which was actually succeeding in raising the literacy rate and moving peolpe out of povery, Republicans have sabotaging government programs and then pointing to there failure as an example of why we should privatize everything.

[LuckyBlessed]

Sure, the private sector works great! That's why all the mortgage banking executives I worked with were Republican. They understood who had their back.

Here are some other examples of how well the private sector is protecting the American taxpayer by not ripping them off;
million dollar pharmacy benefit managers to rake-in record profits.
, ExpressScripts $567 million. MedCo earned $912 million, while CVS Caremark netted $2.6 billion.
http://www.pssny.org/web/2008/05/pbms_make_millions_while_senior.aspx
or Halliburton, Blackwater, KBR taking billions to build showers that Electrocute or just take billions of cash outright
How the US sent $12bn in cash to Iraq. And watched it vanish
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,329709143-103550,00.html

[krocklin]

What about Enron? World Com? etc. etc. etc.

[torrrep]

What about them? Are they the only companies in their industries or are there choices? With government you have no choice.

[krocklin]

O my God. Another former Enron executive. Just when I thought we had squashed all of them.

[GregJL]

I like them just fine, when the money intended for them is actually spent on them, instead of four to five times as much being given to contractors to perform work that isn't as good as would have been done by the Federal agencies. For instance, I think it would have been a hell of a lot better for the FDA to run trials on drugs instead of allowing the pharms to do it themselves. BECAUSE THAT IS THE FUNCTION OF THE GOVERNMENT. Executives at pharm companies don't care if their drugs are harmful to others.

Btw, the USPS runs extremely well. Social Security is functioning very well. Medicare (well, before THIS administration) also works well. Not sure of the latest numbers on public hospitals, but from what I remember reading, they are no slouches.

And consider this from NPR:

While residents in Europe and Japan may pay higher insurance premiums or taxes than Americans, in the end, when all costs are added up, Americans spend more money on health care per person — with fewer people covered.

http://www.npr.org/news/specials/healthcare/healthcare_profiles.html

[torrrep]

That's exactly the problem. When the government is involved you can almost guarantee that half of the money is going to be wasted. For example. They have a measure on the ballot here in California for building a light rail system to ease traffic congestion. The bill calls for around 10 billion in bonds. Of that 10 billion more than 1 billion is going just to the study and planning of the system. That is absolutely ridiculous. I don't think the USPS is as good as you think. I just had a package shipped last week and was given a tracking number. Not once was I given any information other than the package been shipped. When I use UPS I know exactly where that package is at all times and the status of the delivery. Social Security is not functioning well. Neither is Medicare. The money I have invested in Social security would have more than tripled even after this big loss in the stock market. Can't say the same for SS.

[rnadna]

The Economy is a human endeavor. It is governed and driven by human psychology.
Unless anyone lives on Mars, we all know the results of human psychology! Some good some very bad! Do you think that all the bad psychology is left at the Door when humans pursue their economic endeavors? If you do then you do live on Mars!

The Economy has to be regulated by the same rules we regulate our criminal and warlike tendencies. To do otherwise is pure nonsense!

[LuckyBlessed]

No, no, Republicans are right. People by nature will do what is in the best interests of others.

[Jazzbeau]

8^)

[carriellbee]

Thank you, Arianna! This is exactly right. Now what can we do to make sure it happens?

[LuckyBlessed]

Get some negative ads on the facts the Republicans don't want the public to know.

[kells1001]

The beautiful thing about Democracy in government is that when we need to make a change we can always vote for a new candidate where there are no golden parachutes. If only we could avoid the big money it takes to win elections and the big money from special interests. Corporate over site is still the key to avoiding these types of debacles. Once the system gets out of whack, it's anything goes and every man or bank for themselves. Now the tax payer is responsible for the victims and the voter is responsible for the criminals.

[Rocku]

Ah... but at one time, in my youth, we DID avoid the big money necessary to elect candidates­.... It was called EQUAL TIME and was free for all qualified candidates as a public service REQUIRED of the media in order to have a license to use the airwaves. The repeal of that, and the subsequent takeover of ALL the media by the so called "Seven Lords of the Media" have led us to this place we are now. Both parties are responsible, but the Republicans can take most of the blame.

And though Adrianna is pro "gun control" I might remind her that if the current 70,000 gun control laws are not enough to satisfy her, then perhaps she should contemplate this: In the 36 States which have either passed or been forced by initiative to accept "must issue" concealed carry laws the crime rates declined. In those States which have no provision for law abiding citizens to carry guns the crime rates are up! There are 90 million gun owners in this country, we are all of voting age, and we can and will vote our interests! If there was a pro gun-owner Democrat running for President, he would surely be elected by a landslide! As it is, as bad as the present Republican administration is, it will be close! I'm and Independent and so are most of my friends and none of us are happy with the choices we will be making this election.

[rj121046]

The more I read on this whole bailout the more I want congress to stand firm until we the people on main street get the assurances we need. The time for a New Deal is now ,and we the people, are in the position of getting it accomplished.

[marilyn1227]

Congress needs to act as statesmen and stateswomen and not politically. We need to include regulation of our financial institutions in this bill and not pay any more than 70 cents on the dollar for the subprime mortgages. Most of the subprime mortgages were for higher amounts than the properties are now worth. Our home's value has diminished considerably because of the irresponsibility of our financial institutions. The taxpayers need to be assured that they are not going to lose; we homeowners have already lost so much!

[littlebuddylouie]

That seems to a big part of the problem that needs to be addressed immediately. The numbers I've heard claim that between ten and twenty milliion people are currently paying mortgages that are far higher than what the property is worth.
Up until fairly recently, I was routinely getting a lot of junk mail from banks offering home equity lines of credit. I know plenty of other people that were getting the same thing, and all of that seems to have come to a screeching halt for now. When the house of cards comes down, it comes down FAST.