The senior senator from Pennsylvania and perpetual gadfly of the GOP has an annoyingly dull and unconvincing op-ed in the Washington Post today explaining his vote on the stimulus. The first sentence tells you all you need to know about his reasons, and it also shows some really flawed thinking about government action with regard to economic downturn.
I am supporting the economic stimulus package for one simple reason: The country cannot afford not to take action.
Katherine and I were discussing this yesterday; would it not be a marvelous idea just to see what would happen if the government didn’t take any spending action? We’re being told that the situation is so bad that there’s absolutely, 100% no alternative to doing something (unless it’s something the Republicans suggest). There seems to be a problem when Congress and the White House want to spend a great deal of our money (and it is our money) but doesn’t want to seem to talk about different ways to do so.
Katherine pointed me to this quote from Louisiana Conservative yesterday, which sort of belies the meme that’s been going around that this stimulus just HAS to go through NO MATTER WHAT OR ELSE!!!!! If it needs GOP support, why not throw them a bone?
This is one argument Obama has made that I simply can’t fathom anybody taking up his defense for. He’s complaining about Republican partisanship because as he said “are complaining about 1% of the spending in the stimulus package.” But what the Republicans are complaining about are legitimate complaints and if it only amounts to 1%, and this bill must pass, quit being stupid and remove that only 1% of not stimulus spending so you can pass this bill that is urgently needed. It must not be that urgent if he can’t remove 1% of wasteful spending in the bill in order to get it passed… unless of course it amounts to a much bigger percentage of wasteful spending, which is what it is.
At any rate, Sen. Specter’s defection is incredibly frustrating when he tailors it with this notion of emergency. He may think he is being pragmatic by just getting along with the majority, but at what cost? Does he just not believe in free market values, or are there more nuanced reasons for his support?
Yes, Arlen Specter has always been at odds with social conservatives in the party, but now he solidifies the break with free market conservatives and libertarians as well. Are we really that desperate for a GOP vote in the senate that we feel we have to run such a centrist tool in blue Pennsylvania?
