As I write, the Senate has passed the economic stimulus package, sending it back to the House for the final stage of negotiations. It's a wonder they achieved any deal, however fragile it was, considering the attempts by Congressional Republicans to dynamite the process.
Three Republican senators supported the stimulus package, which is downright shameful. Of 219 Republicans on Capitol Hill, only three had the gumption to buck party leaders and broker a compromise with the Democrats.
The rest justify their attempted obstructionism by claiming that the stimulus is not a "bipartisan solution," which is patently false. While final numbers may vary, about 58 percent of the bill is government spending, the preferred recovery policy of Democrats. The other 42 percent is comprised of tax cuts, the preferred stimulus measure of Republicans. Despite the fact that many Democrats argued against the tax cuts, they were included to attract votes from across the aisle.
They attracted three. Hallelujah for bipartisanship!
By contrast, 40 Democrats supported President Bush's economic growth package in 2001, a package composed almost entirely of tax cuts. In other words, Democrats were told to stuff it, and they still managed to be more cooperative than Republicans are being.
If they had their own ideas to offer, the Republicans' almost-unanimous negation wouldn't be so offensive. Yet when pressed for solutions of their own, these Republicans have only one answer: tax cuts. If this answer sounds familiar, it should. For eight long years, tax cuts were the solution thrown at every economic problem, every time. They were the president's bread-for-the-masses - a popular bit of sloganeering that stimulated Bush's election results more than they did the American economy. So we've tried the tax-cuts-cure-all approach. In case you forgot, we are currently staring into the economic abyss. Call it a hunch, but something tells me Bush economics weren't quite a rousing success.
I'm not arguing that tax cuts can't help the economy - I'm arguing that they're occasionally useful but wholly inadequate. If they are targeted to soften the impact of this recession on those who need help most, I can understand their inclusion. But they simply won't solve the problems of an economy that has shed almost a million jobs since the year began. They are relief, not recovery. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar, pure and simple.
I have a message for Republicans on Capitol Hill: This is what life feels like when you're in the minority (and a small minority, at that). You don't get to construct policy. You get to watch policy being constructed and hope it doesn't offend your delicate sensitivities. Democrats watched for years as President Bush ran amok with the help of a Republican Congress. They feel your pain, believe me.
It may seem unfortunate, but elections have consequences, and this is one of them: If you lose, you lose. You don't get to continue acting like you won. The country made a big, collective decision last November, and we decided we preferred the ideas of the guy with the "D" next to his name.
Typically, this is the point at which those ideas become reality. Deal with it.
Jake Miller is a political science and anthropology senior. His column appears weekly.
