Today on Blogcritics
Home » Republican Proposals Reaffirm the Party’s Commitment to the Failed Welfare/Warfare State

Republican Proposals Reaffirm the Party’s Commitment to the Failed Welfare/Warfare State

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

In an attempt to emulate the electoral success they enjoyed in 1994, House Republicans presented their version of the 1994 Contract with America this past week. The new document tagged “A Pledge to America” details in its 48 pages the legislative agenda House Republicans will pursue if elected to a majority this fall. Among the worthwhile proposals put forth in the document are repeal of Obamacare and the immediate cancellation of all unspent stimulus funds. Beyond that, the Republican’s campaign platform lacks creativity and courage, favors special interests, and reaffirms the Republican Party’s commitment to the failed welfare/warfare state.

Of course, no Republican agenda would be complete without the standard proposals for tax cuts. If the Republicans take the House they promise to renew the Bush tax cuts and give small business owners “a tax deduction equal to 20 percent of their business income.” Now, tax breaks are always a good thing because the private sector can allocate money way more effectively than government, but the Republicans really need to branch out from their uncreative, politically popular tax cut proposals if they are really serious about turning the country around. What good is more money in your pocket if the cost of things continues to rise? How about proposing a new monetary system to replace the Federal Reserve’s? How about proposing one that serves all the people not just the banks? Maybe we could get one that puts real restraints on the spendthrift tendencies of politicians? You know, one that provides a sound currency, backed up by a scarce commodity, which would ensure real price stability not the type the Fed provides now where prices increase over time to benefit corporate America. But, House Republicans dare not propose that because their benefactors on Wall Street would get upset and they themselves would be negatively affected because they wouldn’t have the Federal Reserve around to monetize all their deficit spending.

Next up, House Republicans are pledging to alleviate the burdens of federal regulations on business. The idea is if regulations are light businesses will prosper, hire, and our economy will return to full health. You can’t beat that logic. But, Republicans draw a line in the sand. Under their “Pledge”, they will only require “congressional approval of any new federal regulation that has an annual cost to our economy of $100 million or more”. What is so special about $100 million? Is that the monetary threshold where regulations are most effective in protecting special interests by hindering new players from entering a market while at the same time minimizing the effect on the profits of the same special interests? It is bad enough that most federal regulations on business are unconstitutional. At the very least, Congress should approve all regulations. But if Republicans were really serious about producing a prosperous economy they would talk about repealing onerous regulations which stifle competition and only serve narrow special interests.

Their proposals to “stop out of control spending and reduce the size of government” in “A Pledge to America” are so ridiculous it is embarrassing. House Republicans want to cut government spending to “pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels”. This, they claim, will save us $100 billion in the first year and put “us on a path to begin paying down the debt, balancing the budget, and ending the spending spree in Washington that threatens our children’s future”. Question, weren’t we on a spending spree pre-stimulus – pre-bailout? In the seven years preceding the stimulus and bailouts didn’t a Republican president and Congress increase the national debt by $5 trillion – almost doubling it? I don’t understand how a mere $100 billion is going to help us eliminate a deficit that could be $2 trillion this year? This proposal is a joke.

And in a real sign that they dig the welfare state, House Republicans are pledging to “reform” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They will end the government takeover, shrink their portfolios, and establish minimum capital requirements. Again, Republicans claim their proposal will save the taxpayer money – as much as $30 billion.

However, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the government bailout of Fannie and Freddie could swell to $400 billion and if housing prices continue their downward trajectory costs could hit as much as $1 trillion. In light of these massive losses for taxpayers, Republicans must be joking when they boast their reform proposals will save a mere $30 billion. They sound like Democrats. If Republicans want to renew American prosperity they should privatizing both Fannie and Freddie, end the implicit guarantee of federal bailouts, and let the free market handled mortgages.

Lastly, under their leadership the House Republicans promise that the warfare state will be safe and secure. Well, they don’t say that exactly. They cloak their speech with emotional words in an effort to make opposing them an unpatriotic act. Instead they say, “When asked to provide our troops with the resources they need, we will do so without delay”. So, does that mean Republicans are willing to give blank checks to the military industrial complex? If it does, the Republicans will be spending all of their proposals savings and then some. More importantly, as the party of war, how many more conflicts will they get our troops into?

A Pledge to America is a wonderful reminder of why the American voters rejected the Republican Party in 2006 and 2008. Economically, all they really offer are tax breaks. In foreign affairs, they offer more war. If they are so concerned about restoring American greatness, they should be proposing: reform of the monetary system, huge cutbacks in every federal department and agency, and closing down bases and bringing the troops home to defend America. But, it seems the Republicans lack the creativity and courage to do that. They prefer instead to favor special interests and recommit to the failed welfare/warfare state.

Powered by

About Kenn Jacobine

  • Arch Conservative

    The welfare state mentality is like herpes.

    Once it shows up on the scene, it “aint never” leaving. Not until the body dies at least.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Your idea is a dream, dream-pt by people who don’t see the human sufferings and consequences of their dreams. For many, this plan would be a nightmare.

    However, I do agree with parts of your article, Kenn. The absence of any answers(at all)to what all of the displaced working families and individuals are supposed to do in your world are missing. Perhaps you see a lot of servants in America’s future? I hope to god not…

    Here are the parts I agree with:

    The Republican’s campaign platform lacks creativity and courage, favors
    special interests, and reaffirms the Republican Party’s commitment to the failed welfare/warfare state.

    under their leadership the House Republicans promise that the warfare state will be safe and secure. Well, they don’t say that exactly. They cloak their speech with emotional words in an effort to make opposing them an unpatriotic act. Instead they say, “When asked to provide our troops with the resources they need, we will do so without delay”. So, does that mean Republicans are willing to give blank checks to the military industrial complex? If it does, the Republicans will be spending all of their proposals savings and then some. More importantly, as the party of war, how many more conflicts will they get our troops into?

    I can’t tell you enough times to leave Fannie and Freddy alone. There are many socialist-style programs that work for all of the people in this country, they are for those that require a little help reaching that American dream, ownership.

    Have a nice Sunday and remember, here you don’t have to attend a church. America is a secular country.

    peace

  • Kenn Jacobine

    jeannie,

    I appreciate your sentiments, but we disagree about who is responsible for the underclass. We each are individually responsible through ourselves, private charity, places of worship, and other civic organizations. The government has no right to steal my money and give it to another. Also, the government has shown time and again its inability to help the downtrodden. Cost overruns, corruption, and disincentives to get off the dole are just a small sample of what goes wrong when government “helps” the poor. By the way, there are so many displaced working families and individuals because of government policies.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Repeat-I can’t tell you enough times to leave Fannie and Freddy alone. There are many socialist-style programs that work for all of the people in this country, they are for those that require a little help reaching that American dream, ownership.

    Just as long as you keep your distance, we’ll be safe.

    ;) lol I hope you don’t teach children this *stuff*!

  • Kenn Jacobine

    Unlike my ultra liberal colleagues in the U.S. public schools who do teach their students to love the government and depend on it to take care of you from cradle to grave, I teach my students critical thinking skills so they can determine themselves that the state is a corrupt fraud.

  • Mark

    The State is an impediment to the resolution of class conflict and the development of solutions to capitalism’s poverty problem.

    …nothing a little anarchy couldn’t cure

  • Kenn Jacobine

    Mark,
    I don’t think capitalism has a poverty problem. It has raised more out of poverty than any other economic system. We have historically had a very fluid system in terms of movements between lower, middle, and upper class. Many of the immigrants at the turn of the 20th Century came here with not much more than the shirts on their backs. They and their descendants have been generally very successful.

  • Mark

    Kenn, capitalism, at its best, is just a step along the way to eliminating poverty — it won’t get us there. Its practice has the contradictory effect of creating poverty for many as it reduces it for a few. You, a world traveler, must have seen plenty of evidence of this.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Then there will always be a teaching job for you here.

    I’m sorry to be so bold, but it is necessary.

  • Kenn Jacobine

    Mark,

    I have lived in the developing world where capitalism is hard to find. First of all, property rights, probably the number one tenet of capitalism, are totally unprotected in these countries. Secondly, you generally have the small upper class and the very large lower class. This is a result of a strict historical social hierarchy and domination in the government by the upper classes. These upper classes then perpetrate crony capitalism, nepotism and enormous amounts of corruption. Zimbabwe is a perfect example – white farms were confiscated and given to Mugabe’s cronies who in turn have caused starvation in the country. Mugabe has run the printing presses to the point where his currency is destroyed. Those that have talent leave the country thus causing more hardship.

  • Kenn Jacobine

    jeannie,

    I don’t understand your implication #10.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy (aka He-Man)

    I don’t think capitalism has a poverty problem. It has more out of poverty than any other economic system.

    It has created more poverty than any other economic system and has done so on a massive global scale.

    You can watch this and learn something. It pretty much explains it all starting back in the 13th century. But I doubt you will.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy (aka He-Man)

    It has raised more

    I messed up that quote.

  • Mark

    Little of the developing world has been spared capitalist privatization and exploitation of once commonly held resources. Not hard to find evidence of this at all. Cindy recently posted a link to the documentary “The End of Poverty?” which does a pretty good job of marshaling examples.

    Also, I think that if you look clearly at US crony capitalism you’ll find that it isn’t all that much different from Zimbabwe’s, at least in principle.

  • Mark

    (note to self — check for new comments before posting…)

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Kenn,

    I thought that you were Libertarian, and wondered what you would say, that’s all. No implication of what?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/dr-dreadful/ Dr Dreadful

    I teach my students critical thinking skills so they can determine themselves that the state is a corrupt fraud.

    The irony in that statement, whether intentional or not, is exquisite.

  • John Wilson

    Yes, very revealing.

  • Kenn Jacobine

    Cindy,

    When I click on your link it takes me to Hula and a SNL skit. Please advise – I would love to watch the video you referenced.

  • Kenn Jacobine

    Mark,

    Crony capitalism is not real capitalism. Crony capitalism is a part of the welfare state. It is giving the people’s resources to well connected corporations through taxation, monetary policy, and the legislative process just like Uncle Scam does with organizations (ACORN) and individuals. All of it is wasteful and in the long run causes huge dis-locations in our economy which causes unemployment and recession.

  • kurt brigliadora

    You are right … Crony capitalism is not real , it is part of the welfare state.and all that comes with it. I think this problem can only grow; because its to expensive to get an education these days…so peeps might take the easy way out!

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Kenn,

    Hmmm, the link works for me, strange. So here, try this, click on my homepage and the entry The End of Poverty? is the second one down (at the moment) posted on the 24th of September.

    I am pleasantly surprised that you want to see it.

    Further re: #20. Can you describe a time that there ever was capitalism (and its gonzo accumulation) without the state? What does your vision of ‘real’ capitalism look like?

  • John Wilson

    Crony capitalism is the epitome of capitalism. How could it not be, considering our politics and business practices?

  • Cannonshop

    #23 Wrong, John-you can’t have Crony Capitalism without Government Financial and attending use of Government Force…usually to forcibly create outcomes that the free market would not produce. Effectively it’s more socialism without the mask of make-believe concern for the masses.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    socialism without the mask of make-believe concern for the masses.

    This makes no sense. But, when the game is twist and rewrite everything, it’s expected.