The Corner

So Much For Bipartisanship

Harry Reid doesn’t like the Baucus-Grassley compromise stimulus package “jobs bill,” so he’s calling for a rewrite:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is rewriting a jobs bill after Democrats complained of too many concessions to Republicans.  

 

Reid announced Thursday that he would cut back on the jobs bill Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) introduced only hours earlier, essentially overruling the powerful chairman.

“We’re going to move this afternoon to a smaller package than talked about in the press,” Reid said.

No matter what they end up calling it, the facts remain: This is another stimulus bill, paid for by borrowing another $100 billion or so at a time when a handful of highly indebted developed countries are teetering on the brink of default. Whatever stimulative effect this bill might have on its own (and I doubt it would have much) would be offset by its contribution to our rapidly rising government debt, which will sooner or later generate a significant drag on growth.

In a way, it’s good that Reid is nakedly eschewing bipartisanship* — it gives Senate Republicans cover to take our advice:

… Obama hopes the public will not notice that his new “jobs bill” is composed of the same policies that were in the old “stimulus package.” Senate Republicans should have better sense: They should unite in opposition to this folly, pointing out that it’s been tried, and that it’s time to try something else.

* Apologies for the mental image of Reid doing anything nakedly.

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

The Rise of the Abortion Cheerleaders

Is abortion a sad and unfortunate reality — regrettable, as we are sometimes told, but often necessary — or is it a breezy nothingburger, completely “normal,” and something to be giddily celebrated like a last-minute NFL touchdown?  For a long time, the abortion lobby has had difficulty deciding. This ... Read More
World

Europe Needs to Grow Up

It was a hot and difficult summer. And Europeans were pained to hear the blunt assessment that the U.S. would not be able to forever sustain NATO without greater investment on their part. The alliance was heading for “collective military irrelevance” and the current state of affairs was “unacceptable,” ... Read More