iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

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

Robert Reich

Posted: December 11, 2010 02:06 PM

Bill Clinton seems the perfect validator for Barack Obama -- which is why the president is utilizing the former president for selling his tax deal. After all, the economy boomed when Clinton was president and 22 million net new jobs were created. From a more narrow political perspective -- and this is important to Democrats in Washington -- Bill Clinton was reelected, even though he lost both houses of Congress in the 1994 midterms.

But the analogy falls apart as soon as you realize Clinton's economy was vastly different from Obama's. The recession Clinton inherited was relatively small, and caused by the Fed raising interest rates too high to ward off inflation. So it could be reversed by the Fed lowering interest rates -- as the Fed did in 1994. By 1995, the so-called "jobless recovery" had morphed into a full-blown jobs recovery. By 1996, at pollster Dick Morris's urging, Clinton could proclaim to the American people "you've never had it so good, and you ain't seen nothing yet."

The Great Recession has been far larger, caused not by the Fed raising interest rates but by the bursting of a giant housing bubble. In 2008, the biggest asset of most middle-class people, upon which they borrowed and that they assumed would be their nest eggs for retirement, collapsed. Housing prices continue to fall in most parts of the country. The Fed has lowered interest rates all it can, and unemployment remains sky high.

Bill Clinton presided over an economic boom engineered by Fed chair Alan Greenspan, who felt confident he could drop interest rates far lower than anyone expected without risking inflation. The result was 4 percent unemployment in many parts of America, as well as the best jobs recovery in history.

The price Greenspan exacted from Clinton -- and a resurgent Republican congress demanded -- was a balanced budget. As a result, Clinton had to give up much of his "investment agenda" in education, infrastructure, and other long-neglected means of building the productivity of average working Americans. The economy enjoyed a huge cyclical recovery.

But the economy's underlying structure remained as it had been before, including stagnant wages for most Americans. Within a few years the middle and working class was treating their homes as ATMs, borrowing trillions of dollars in order to maintain their standard of living, and at the same time demand enough goods and services to keep almost everyone in jobs.

Those days are over. The Democratic Party can no longer ignore critical investments in the productivity of average workers. Nor can it ignore the increasing concentration of income and wealth at the very top, and the inability of America's middle and working class to get the economy moving again.

The GOP hasn't changed their story or their strategy since the 1990s. It's the fault of big government. That was false then, and it's false now. The structural problems are now much worse, and the cyclical recovery from the Great Recession pathetically anemic.

If the Democratic Party has stood for anything over the years it is to maintain and restore upward mobility for the majority of working Americans, ensure that the playing field isn't tilted in the direction of the privileged, and limit the power of the richest among us to entrench themselves and their heirs into a semi-permanent plutocracy.

Continuing the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, including a sharp cut in the estate tax, violates these core principles. Doing so in the midst of an economic emergency that demands bold measures to rescue America's vast middle and working class adds further insult. For President Obama and former President Clinton to tell America there's "no other choice" or that "this is the best we can do" -- when Democrats remain putatively in control of the House, Senate, and the presidency -- is misleading.

I admire Barack Obama and Bill Clinton. I advised the former and worked for the latter. They are good men. But they have either been outwitted by the privileged and powerful of America, or seduced by those on Wall Street and the executive suites of America into believing that the Republican nostrums are necessary, or succumbed Democratic advisors who think in terms of small-bore tactics rather than large and principled strategies.

I urge congressional Democrats to remember the larger principles -- not in order to be purist or make the perfect the enemy of the better, but to move toward an economy and a society that we believe in, that reflects the needs of the vast majority of Americans at this difficult time.

Robert Reich is the author of Aftershock: The Next Economy and America's Future, now in bookstores. This post originally appeared at RobertReich.org.

 
 
 
Bill Clinton seems the perfect validator for Barack Obama -- which is why the president is utilizing the former president for selling his tax deal. After all, the economy boomed when Clinton was presi...
Bill Clinton seems the perfect validator for Barack Obama -- which is why the president is utilizing the former president for selling his tax deal. After all, the economy boomed when Clinton was presi...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 2,532
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (55 total)
02:38 PM on 12/14/2010
Your Social Security Checks
I just got a letter from the Social Security Administration saying that the Department of Labor's Consumer Index (CPI) has determined that our cost of living has not risen since the last cost of living increase in 2008 and as a result our Social Security benefits will not increase in 2011.
A friend told that they don't include food when they determine the cost of living..do they eat? My check and millions of other's Social Security checks will have NO increase of benefits (money) while it looks like the wealthy will be richer - if Congress does not let the BUSH tax cuts on the wealthy expire. ARE WE TAKING FROM THE POOR AND GIVING IT TO THE RICH???
photo
pickles n pops
Restore pre-1981 income and inheritance tax rates
09:56 PM on 12/14/2010
There are much bigger problems looming for you than no COLA if the Obama-GOP deal is passed by Congress. The massive additional debt which a Bush tax cuts extension will trigger, will result in a downgrading of the bond rating for USTs. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6BC32L20101213

And Obama's proposed payroll tax cut for workers doesn't just reduce funding for SS and Medicare at the very time it needs to be increased; it opens the Pandora's Box for a free-for-all raid on the funding source for these retirement programs that WE'VE ALREADY PAID FOR. The GOP has lusted for years at the prospect of cutting or eliminating the EMPLOYER contribution. Obama's given them the green light now with this first step.

Even if it seems hopeless to you, please write or call your Senators and MC to express your concerns, and ask that they vote to reject the Obama-GOP agreement. We must try to stop this.
11:28 PM on 12/14/2010
I think we're still giving to the poor and taking from the rich, just not as much as would like.
01:35 PM on 12/14/2010
Only time will tell if America's Mediator-in-Chief is smarter than all the rest of us that clearly see the drift toward the Plutocracy of the Rich and Greedy. We could just be in another cycle of democrats helping the middle class and the greater world and then the republicans come along and rob the store.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
beverlyg
12:02 PM on 12/14/2010
All of the persons that produced the compromise make more than the $200,000 to $250,000 that was the maximum in Pres.Obama's proposal. They all (including Obama) benefited from the compromise. Media pundits.did all they could to advance the compromise. Why? They too make more.than that.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JoanMeijer
Author of Relentless: The Search For Typhoid Mary
11:58 AM on 12/14/2010
What Robert Reich didn't mention is that Bill Clinton's laws are very much responsible for the troubles that we are in. Dismantling the banking rules that were put in place during the Depression was a Clinton policy as was dismantling the safety net for the Nation's poor. We should all realize that Bill Clinton didn't protect average Americans - so how can we trust him when he backs this lousy Obama tax legislation?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cathleen
10:24 AM on 12/14/2010
They are discussing this legislation on the Diane Rehm show right now.

Question just sent in

I am so confused about this tax cut extension and this legislation that is quickly moving through both houses. Obama and Clinton both say this is the best the Dems could get. Dr. Robert Reich in his latest piece at Huffington Post as well as my hard core blue collar Dem mother of 84 says " Obama and the Dems should draw the line in the sand on this issue."

Dr. Reich "f the Democratic Party has stood for anything over the years it is to maintain and restore upward mobility for the majority of working Americans, ensure that the playing field isn't tilted in the direction of the privileged, and limit the power of the richest among us to entrench themselves and their heirs into a semi-permanent plutocracy. Continuing the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, including a sharp cut in the estate tax, violates these core principles. Doing so in the midst of an economic emergency that demands bold measures to rescue America's vast middle and working class adds further insult. For President Obama and former President Clinton to tell America there's "no other choice" or that "this is the best we can do" -- when Democrats remain putatively in control of the House, Senate, and the presidency -- is misleading."

Who should the working class out here believe?
photo
8arrows
Crushing my enemies and driving them before me
11:32 PM on 12/13/2010
I keep hearing this line about not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. The problem is that everything Obama gets behind is a case of the mediocre being the enemy of the good, better, and perfect.
10:08 PM on 12/13/2010
Oh yes they want semi-permanent Plutocracy, oh yes indeedy! I enjoyed your post so much, I felt someone at last was speaking, good common sense. Thanks again for being on Huffington Post.
08:27 PM on 12/13/2010
the rich - the American aristocracy, the well paid and coddled military, strictly speaking the ringknockers not the privates - the cossacks, the (in Reich's words ) middle and working class - the peasants, whose playing Czar is left to those who like conspiracies to figure out but it sure as H _ _ _ isn't BHO. Now all we need are some serious food shortages or steep price increases and bloom goes your charade of democracy.
05:17 PM on 12/13/2010
Someone please tell me, am I wrong to think that the financial (banks, etc) deregulation which Clinton negotiated (or not) with the Republicans in 1999 have paved the way for the crooks who are responsible for the bail outs. Does anyone else see the connection between Clinton and deregulation? The corporate republicans seem to maniuplate our democratic presidents by making it possible for our democratic presidents to look like what they are doing is good for us, all the while setting up for loss. (Holland. what you say seems to work. Is anyone explaining why it shouldn't?)
01:39 PM on 12/13/2010
All the Democrats have to do is pass their own package through the House, and then use the reconciliation process in the Senate, which would allow them to approve the plan with 51 votes (interestingly, I have read somewhere that the Bush tax cuts were approved in the Senate through reconciliation).. Then the President signs the bill. When the republicans in the house vote to repeal it next year, the Senate rejects the appeal and if that fails, Obwama vetoes the repeal. This seems so obvious--am I the only one in the country to think of it?
02:27 PM on 12/13/2010
Apparently, you are the only one to think of it. Everyone in DC agrees that the answer is keeping tax cuts for the wealthy. Tax cuts, that, interestingly enough, were put in place through reconciliation. Why is it that only Democrats need 60 or more votes to accomplish anything in the Senate?
Maarten Wentink
99%er, 53%er & Job Creator
03:02 PM on 12/13/2010
I was thinking the same thing. Maybe I don't understand all the rules of the senate (and I don't). But maybe it's because the Dems in the senate are devided and there are no 51 votes.
guilatty
Something has got to make sense eventually
01:28 PM on 12/13/2010
I think Mr. Reich, brilliant as he is, is either missing clear signals or is too nice to state directly what is really happening. Corporate America has no allegiance to this country. Hop into a fast jet and 18 hours later you are in Asia. No one is going to "invest" in American productivity. They are simply going to find people who will work cheap. In India, and China, and Malaysia. Productivity is units of output divided by cost. Corporatists loathe a middle class. With increased time and money it can foil corporate ambition with political power. So corporatists seek to defund the working class. Increase productivity by cutting labor costs not by increasing worker output.
Any middle-level manager can pretend to be a hero by cutting salaries and benefits. It works, for a while. There is no way to compete with India or China and maintain a healthy middle class. No way. Either we get protection or we devolve into a corrugated tin and tarpaper society. If we aren't willing to, they know people who are. It IS class warfare. It always has been and always will be.
01:40 PM on 12/14/2010
Guilatty is correct, it's the new global world. The richest man in Taiwan runs a million person factor town in China. The new world is one of global mega rich corporations and their elite management who live in the best places but make their money in the worst, and all the rest of us trying to keep a decent house and job, and complaining on blogs.
01:13 PM on 12/13/2010
Regarding Obama and his re-election triangulation: Democrats will look for a better Democrat, and Republicans won't bite, so it seems he's trying to warm up Indys and hope the base will come home. Good luck w/that.
01:00 PM on 12/13/2010
Just another reminder for me to change my registration to "undeclared".
12:44 PM on 12/13/2010
Just goes to show that everyone has a price. Everyone. Also shows the difference between book smarts and street smarts. Is there anyone out there who can stand up for the average working person and not be swayed by money and special interest? I hear crickets....
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:52 PM on 12/13/2010
Sen. Bernie Sanders, (I) Vermont.
04:55 PM on 12/13/2010
Absolutely right. I second that motion. It's not always about winning or losing. Perception is everything. If people feel you at least put up a good fight, they will respect you for it. That's Obama's problem. People Perceive him to be weak.
12:17 PM on 12/13/2010
It's just a reminder for me to change registration to "undeclared".