More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Robert Kuttner

Robert Kuttner

Posted: June 21, 2010 02:10 PM

The President I Voted for

What's Your Reaction:

My Fellow Americans,

You and I have been hearing a great deal of advice about the importance of cutting the federal deficit. As part of the challenge of restoring America to a condition of economic soundness, we do need to lower the deficit and bring down the national debt relative to our total economic output.

But a lot of the Cassandra voices have the sequence backwards. Right now, we have more urgent business than cutting the deficit.

Thirteen million Americans are out of work, half of them for six months or more. Twelve million more Americans are working part time but want full time jobs, or have given up even looking because there are so few job openings to be had--five people seeking work for every available job vacancy. Even the official unemployment rate is stuck near ten percent.

The last few months have been disappointing. The private sector has begun generating some jobs, but not nearly enough. In May, there were more than 400,000 jobs created, but nearly all of them were temporary jobs with the U.S. Census Bureau. Just 41,000 were private sector jobs. We are never going to put America back to work at this pace.

The private sector is not generating enough jobs because private business isn't entirely confident that this recession is fully over. Businesses are not willing to invest enough or to hire enough. And who can blame them? With nearly ten percent of America's workforce unemployment and anxious, families are watching every penny.

We averted a Great Depression, but this is not good enough. Workers idle, businesses hesitant to invest and hire, consumers deferring spending--that's a recipe for a Great Stagnation.

If America found itself in an all-out war, we would spend whatever it took to be victorious, as our grandparents did during World War II, and our parents did during the Cold War. In those years, we bought a lot of prosperity as an incidental byproduct of our military buildup. If we can spend what it takes to defeat a foreign enemy, surely we can spend what's needed to vanquish the risks of permanent recession.

In many ways, our current economic situation is as dire a threat to our way of life as a war. We face the risk of a stunted generation: Young people who feel like failures before their adult lives have really begun, because they were born at the wrong time. Elderly people who have lost much of their home equity, and their 401 k savings, and either have no pensions or face financial threats to the ones they have. People in the prime of life who are losing everything they have struggled for, including their self respect--all through no fault of their own.

In these circumstances, you have to have a heart of stone to be calling for cuts in Social Security and Medicare, or new taxes on the struggling middle class, as the cure for deficits that are mainly the result of the recession itself. But there are billionaires who lead lives of ease who want struggling Americans to tighten their belts as the solution to a deep jobs recession created by excesses on Wall Street.

I reject their values and I reject their counsel, even as I embrace a better strategy to return America to fiscal and economic health.

Today I am sending Congress legislation that will spend an additional $500 billion in this fiscal year and $500 billion next year, to put America back to work; to refinance mortgages at affordable monthly payments so that housing values stabilize; and to stop the hemorrhage in state and local finances that are leading to cuts in services and layoffs of workers. The money will also finance an emergency Reclamation Corps along the Gulf Coast.

Virtually all Republicans, and even some members of my own party, have refused to approve the smaller sums that I have asked Congress to authorize--money to extend unemployment insurance, and emergency COBRA coverage for people who've lost their health insurance; and to keep 300,000 schoolteachers from being laid off. They block this urgently needed help, either because they are ideologically opposed to government playing its necessary role in a national emergency, or because of concerns about the deficit--concerns that never bothered Republicans when they were increasing deficits to pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest, or needless wars of choice.

Some of these legislators represent America's hardest hit communities. If they vote against this bill, let them explain themselves to America's unemployed workers and their families; and to breadwinners losing their healthcare; and children losing their teachers. I may not succeed in getting Congress to appropriate every nickel of this request, but I am going to fight for this recovery package like I have never fought before.

There are those who say that we need to cut the deficit to reassure financial markets that are worried about inflation. I wonder if these people read the financial pages. Today, the money markets are willing to lend the U.S. government money, by buying government bonds, for thirty years at about four percent. A normal rate of return is around 3 percent. That means markets believe that the next thirty years will be almost inflation-free.

When markets behave like this, it means inflation is the furthest thing from their minds. And, there is not much inflationary pressure when the economy is becalmed. As chief executive, it would be irresponsible of me not to take advantage of this borrowing climate to invest in the jobs America needs at very low borrowing costs to the taxpayer.

Now, what about that deficit? Yes, it is too big. But the best and least painful way to get it under control is to put America back to work, so that more workers and businesses are paying taxes again.

The previous administration dug us quite a hole. And even a full recovery will not quite solve all of the long term deficit and debt problem. But it would be insane and perverse to tackle the deficit before we achieve the recovery. We will need to increase some taxes, but I pledge to you that they will not be taxes on the middle class.

And although we need to run an efficient government as possible, I further pledge to you that we will not balance the budget on the backs of Social Security or Medicare. If my Republican friends think that course necessary policy or smart politics, let's have that debate.

Now, the fiscal commission that was jointly appointed by the Congressional leadership and by me is charged with recommending a long term plan to get the budget back to near-balance, after we achieve a full economic recovery. I support that goal. And I expect the commission to produce a plan that does not tamper with social security or raise taxes on the middle class. Otherwise, it goes straight into my waste-basket.

I also expect the Commission to recognize that recovery comes first. I will look forward to a report that proposes a plan to fiscal stability built on a strong recovery. I will reject one that is built on austerity.

Recently, people as different as David Walker of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, and Lawrence Mishel of the Economic Policy Institute have agreed that we need more deficit spending in the short term so that we can create more jobs now and get to eventual budget discipline in the future without further needless economic sacrifice on the part of American working families.

To those who commend belt tightening, I remind you that for three years now, working Americans have been tightening their belts--and worse. Why is it always those with ample waistlines who want others to make sacrifices? Let them lead the way, by stepping aside and not resisting tax reform, or financial reform, or adequate public investment to put America back to work.

We need to be focusing on possibility, not on austerity. That will be the great cause of my presidency.

Robert Kuttner's new book is A Presidency in Peril. He is co-editor of The American Prospect and a senior fellow at Demos

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 677
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (12 total)
06:09 PM on 07/02/2010
you have my vote!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JeffreyGold
Senator Jeffrey Gold (I)
05:32 PM on 07/02/2010
One correction: Home equity for the elderly is irrelevant! A home is a roof, not an investment, unless you are into buying real estate for the purposes of making money (but you still live in one place at a time). Increased home values also increase property taxes, and, as is the case in Utah for example, if real estate prices have dropped 10%, the state has increased the value of the land beneath the property to make up for that deficit---after all, it funds education and education has a $30 million dollar hole it hopes to make up with tax increases on cigarettes (no complaint here; I hate cigarette smoke).
photo
guveqzero
Inventor and Innovator
04:21 PM on 07/02/2010
The rich need to be taxed at 90%, like after the depression, to stabilize our country. Unless that happens, conservatives will find their neighborhoods putting up fences with tower guards, just like the drug lords.
06:46 PM on 06/22/2010
The uber rich must be destroyed
04:22 AM on 06/23/2010
Destruction is the goal of most liberals.
04:20 PM on 06/22/2010
More spending is not the answer. Our debt is currently at unsustainable rates right now. The most accurate way analyze national debt is to put it relative to percent GDP. Here is analysis from Barrak Obama's own website: Bush started his presidency with national debt at 57% of GDP and left the White House with it at 64%. Obama started it at 64% and took it to 94.3% in just a year and a half and it is predicted to surpass 103% by 2015. It costs taxpayers over 1 trillion dollars a year just to service our debt with interest rates and fees. Spending more? I think it is the most detrimental thing we can do right now. Here is my source:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2011/assets/hist07z1.xls
photo
guveqzero
Inventor and Innovator
04:14 PM on 07/02/2010
If our money supply is not always growing, we are a dead country. What do you propose?
03:55 PM on 06/22/2010
Keynesian economics that was implemented during the Great Depression (and current Obamanomics) has NEVER worked. The latest test tube was tried by Japan during the so-called lost decade. It did not solve their jobs problem or their economy and all it did for Japan is end with a huge debt to pay.

It never ceases to amaze me that people never look to history to see what has worked and will work again.
photo
guveqzero
Inventor and Innovator
04:16 PM on 07/02/2010
The Democratic policies of the great depression shaped our country for 30 years following the depression. Your comments of denial are an affront to FDR and our prosperity after the depression.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
John Robert
current actor, producer, director
03:25 PM on 06/22/2010
Since President Obama has an Imperial Presidency and rules by fiat, we can save money. And also remember, we have czars for all our problems. Therefore , let's fire Congress and the Courts and use that money for other things.
02:54 PM on 06/22/2010
Keep in mind if one person has a lot of money it is not removed - banks/Gov/business make money from no where....The money in my pocket/bank did not get removed from yours......Bill Gates did not take all the money it is still around even though he is very rich
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dctackett
05:47 PM on 06/22/2010
yes, everyone can be a millionaire!!!!!!!!!
02:45 PM on 06/22/2010
The dishonesty & hypocrisy of the repuds & DINOS is beyond belief! They've been doing the same think since RR, and the stats show that it hasn't worked. Are they so self-deluded that, no matter the evidence, they CANNOT own up to their mistakes? Is their loss of face SO great that they cannot see the handwriting on the wall? Is their opinion of themselves so unrealistically high?

Dubya spent eight years effectively castrating EVERY SINGLE watchdog working for the American people. He absolutely wrecks the country, then leaves it for someone else to clean up. If not for the unimaginably horrible consequences, I really would've liked to see another repube try to clean up the mess he left...the repubelickn' way. The revolt would've made the Watts riots look like a pleasant summer's day.

At work, I've had to deal with systems that don't work. What I like to do, when I can, is push them to the breaking point, at which time nobody can say they work. That usually puts people in the mood for a change. Or shows me the situation is hopeless, and I quit. Then, on my next interview, I explain why I quit. I don't want to work for a firm that is GUARANTEED to fail. The expression I use is that I'm tired of shooting myself in the foot. I have NEVER not gained sympathy (and usually a job) doing this. It's not a tactic, it's honesty.
02:44 PM on 06/22/2010
we could just get rid of congress and put a crown on Obama's head - what is wrong with a little tyranny when we need one? We the people just get in the way of grand ideas.....
12:44 PM on 06/22/2010
"this week, I am sending Congress legislation that will put America [We, the People] back to work."

forget that. What should be done, is this :

"this week, We, the People are sending Congress legislation that will put The President back to work..." on the agendas that WE THOUGHT WE HAD ELECTED HIM and this DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL MAJORITY TO DO.

Such as... unwind the U.S. WAR ECONOMY.

unwind the WALL STREET BAILOUT (artificial support of the markets; trading for their own accounts, etc.)

"real" Health Care Reform (not "Health Insurance Reform")

pinning the blame for the Great Recession, the Financial Meltdown, the erosion of our Civil Rights, TORTURE, etc., etc., on BUSH/CHENEY (else, they WILL pin the blame on US!) yadda yadda yadda.

_
We don't need to "put We, the People back to work," thank-you, sir.

WE NEED TO PUT OUR GOVERNMENT BACK TO WORK... for US, not some corporation (for a CHANGE :)
01:54 PM on 06/22/2010
SO fanned!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
owlsocks
"That which sustains life is sacred."
12:43 PM on 06/22/2010
Sadly, that is NOT the president he turned out to be. He is a schlep and we were all lemmings. Now we wait with breath held, until it may be safe to once again exhale.
10:50 AM on 06/22/2010
Congratulations, you've just double downed on the same mistake that Obama made initially. You haven't stopped to fix anything. Obama hasn't fixed anything. That's why we're stomping on the fiscal accelerator and going nowhere. That's why all the King's horses and men can't put Humpty back together. You haven't even identified the problems.

Our Domestic Policies are hamstrung by our Foreign Policies. We have a trillion dollar per year Albatross hanging around our neck. Our militaristic policies insure constant friction with a quarter of the World's population. No other country finds it necessary to occupy or have military dealings with 100 Nations around the globe. The Wars, Defense, CIA, NSA, Homeland Security, black ops, Veterans care and interest on what's borrowed to pay for these cost a trillion dollars per year. These monies produce virtually nothing of substance.

Our wages have stagnated. One way trade treaties exporting jobs and unfettered immigration have decimated those who work to produce goods and services. Republicans are openly hostile to and many Democrats are uncaring toward American workers.

The disparity of wealth is at its highest since the 1920s. Those at the top have taken an ever increasing share of what is produced by all. This has been further exacerbated by tax laws favoring the already favored.

The 2009 budget deficit before Obama took office was estimated to be $1.2 trillion. This was 9% of GDP while the economy collapsed at a rate of 6% and losing 800,000 jobs per month.
10:48 AM on 06/22/2010
Continued:

If the Federal Government can pump the equivalent of 9% of GDP into the economy and it still is shrinking by 6% the problem can't be too little spending. Sure the stimulus at 3% of GDP yearly arrested the fall but all that has transpired is a dead cat bounce. With stimulus winding down the economy is once again slowing. There is little job growth. Consumers (aka workers) have no extra money to grow the economy. Business has no increase in sales to expand on. That only leaves Government to pick up the slack. We can't live on stimulus spending forever and that's all that is proposed.

Adopt a collection of sane Foreign Policies.
End the Wars.
Reduce wasteful military and "security" spending.
Eliminate ALL of the Bush tax cuts.
Re-evaluate trade treaties.
Change the home mortgage deduction to a tax credit of 25% of interest and taxes capped at $2000.
Limit the number of deductions for dependents at 3.
Reduce tax rates for incomes under $100000 (single)/$200000 (joint)
Calculate the standard deduction by (minimum wage rate) x (2080 hours); (2x joint)
Adjust and Index the AMT
Eliminate special treatment of hedge fund earnings
Apply the employee portion of the Social Security and Medicare taxes to all unearned incomes allowing a $10000 (single)/$20000 (joint) exemption
Remove the cap from Social Security and Medicare taxes
Initiate a $500 billion per program to promote renewable energy with tax credits for individuals and business and direct Government investments.
10:55 AM on 06/22/2010
Or make it simpler...just move to Sweden. Bring a parka.
01:14 PM on 06/22/2010
Having seen the women of Sweden I might take you up on that.
11:17 AM on 06/22/2010
Eliminate tax cuts, remove cap from Social Security & Medicare, adjust AMT, (i.e. raise taxes). Herbert Hoover tried raising taxes and made the depression worse.

Reevaluate trade treaties. Again a Hoover tried approach that did not work.
01:13 PM on 06/22/2010
The problem is the velocity of money. It moves at the bottom and lies dormant at the top. By increasing taxes strictly on the top and reinvesting them in productive assets (domestic energy production) you increase the turnover in money and produce value. Also read that taxes on the bottom were decreased putting more into the hands that actually earn it and spend it.
10:33 AM on 06/22/2010
I do not resent the small minority of people who have made tons of money. It is not my money in their bank accounts. I cannot be incited to dislike them, to worry about them. I have more interesting things to do.
11:29 AM on 06/22/2010
You mean you don't give a sh*t about others.
01:01 PM on 06/22/2010
No it means what I said: I am not jealous of people who have made lots of money and I do not resent them. I cannot be incited to dislike them for it. Their money is not mine. What they do with it is up to them. Caring about people does not require jealousy, envy, or suspicion of the wealthy.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
zogimperator
is this microbiology?
01:38 PM on 06/22/2010
Nobody is suggesting a "resentment" tax. The top 1% has 50% of the wealth. That means half of all the property and money in this country has been consolidated in the portfolios of a tiny handful of people. If we taxed these people at the 50% rate, they'd still be so rich they couldn't spend their money in a million years. The nation, meanwhile, would have the money to reinvest in making more people rich -- or at least comfortable.
You don't need to worry your mind about it. Do your interesting things. But understand this isn't just a matter of resentful folks demanding a piece of the ultra-rich. It's a class war the ultra-rich have resoundingly won, and they're not going to rest until your money is in their hands, too.