In Europe, populist response to government policy looks a lot different than in America. The French are rioting in the streets … because President Nicolas Sarkozy proposed to raise the retirement age by a mere two years. But, as The Economist notes, America’s Tea Partiers “are the opposite: they exhale fiscal probity through every pore.” The French, on the other hand, “appear to believe that public money is printed in heaven and will rain down for ever like manna.”
This appraisal, “The good, the bad, and the tea parties,” recognizes that the Tea Party is not violent, doesn’t even litter much. In sum, the Tea Party is “[n]ot French, not fabricated and not as flaky as their detractors aver: these are the positives. Another one: in how many other countries would a powerful populist movement demand less of government, rather than endlessly and expensively more?”
Interestingly, The Economist pushes the practical point, arguing that if Tea Party “Republicans capture the House, they need to move past ideology into the realm of practical policy.”
This echoes what I argued this weekend on Townhall: “[I]f Republicans in Congress are serious about restoring fiscal sanity to Washington, they will hold all the cards necessary to do so. The Obama Administration simply cannot spend money the U.S. House refuses to raise or appropriate.”
This will lead to a game of chicken with the Obama administration, threats of a government shutdown.
So, who will blink first?
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
5 replies on “The Upcoming Game of Chicken”
Clinton did this kind of thing back when. Only impact on most peoples’ lives was those who were trying to drive on roads that cut through national parks. Folks got turned back, ostensibley because there was no government employee on duty. In all the years of driving on that road, no one had even known that a government employee had even been on duty, but they made darn sure that the road didn’t get used during the “shutdown”. Most of the imnpact was the cessation of “nonessential” services. And unconstitutional too.
The French, on the other hand, “appear to believe that public money is printed in heaven and will rain down for ever like manna.”
But, since both American Progressives and Many Europeans (particularly the French) believe that the State has assumed the role previously occupied by God, shouldn’t it follow that the government’s printing money would be the same as its having been printed in heaven?
The GOP will blink– like the Dems., they are hooked on earmarks. It WAS THE REPUBLICAN TOM DE LAY who expanded earmarks. It was the REPUBLICAN DE LAY who would only deal with REPUBLICAN LOBBYISTS. ( I AM A REPUBLICAN, BY THE WAY). Pelosi & Reid just took the scrript that DeLay wrote, and exxpanded it. AND HOW MANY REPUBLICAN SENATORS & CONGRESSMEN- WHEN BUSH WAS PRESIDENT- SHOWED FINANCIAL RESTRAINT (AND/OR SOME HONESTY?)- damn few. And how many really showed (other then Obamacare) fiscal responsibility these last 2 years? Probably few.
I have doubts that the Republicans will cut spending significantly. Will they touch Social Security, Medicare or Defense? If they don’t they really won’t cut spending much. If they do touch Social Security or Medicare, they will give the Democrats an opening to attacking Republicans as insensitive towards recipients of these programs. While some Republicans want to cut these programs, I doubt many will have the guts.
I give the cutters my support, and wish them luck.
Perhaps a compromise is in the offing: Republicans cut military spending while Democrats cut Medicare/Social Security. I sure hope so.
A prefcet reply! Thanks for taking the trouble.