Magazine | October 3, 2011, Issue

Proper Aim

(Rich Schmitt/Zuma/Newscom)

Ask any employer, and you’ll hear the same lament: We’d love to hire people, but we need an inexplicable modification of the tax code exquisitely calibrated to provide a tiny incentive. Well, the president has intuited their needs, and brought forth a bill that will get the nation moving again. At first it was rather vague, and we wondered whether we’d have to pass it in order to know what’s in it — a phrase that should be spoken only by a doctor in reference to a stool sample — but now we have some hard-core specifics. It goes something like this:

Employer (hereafter, “enemy of the people”) shall receive, or get, or be entitled to get by way of receiving, a 0.05 percent quarterly reduction in the adjusted tax rate for fiscal 2012 according to Schedule B pursuant to the 1983 amendments to Article 3, Subsection II, of the Tax Simplification Act of 1982, if Employer shall hire a person who has been unemployed for more than, but not less than, but equal to, in the sense of being the same as, nine months (averaged as calendrical units of 29 days each); “unemployment” shall be construed for purposes of this act to mean continuous sitting on the sofa, staring blankly at the wall, wishing that listening to those old Springsteen records helped, but man, it just doesn’t.

This shall not be construed as a replacement of the 1933 Fitz-Sturgeon Employers Credit Reduction Addition Act, or the 2001 revisions of the 2000 revisions of the 1993 Transparency in Government Act (Latin-language version). Offer may be withdrawn at any time. Void where prohibited. Ask your doctor if this bill is right for you.

That ought to do it. Then there’s the Rick Perry approach: See that tax over there, sittin’ on the fencepost? Okay, I’m going to shoot it with my eyes closed and it’s gonna not be there afterwards. Here, hold my beer.

The Perry approach has two things going for it: simplicity, and effectiveness. When Obama ascended to the Oval Office, it was seen as the rise of the Smart People, the cool and credentialed intellects who could tweak and recalibrate the magnificent machinery of government. Inequity: down, somehow. Also sea levels. We would have a green economy; the evening news would run stories on high-school dropouts who now design software for wind farms or invent solar-powered tofu extruders.

The Perry approach: That’s fine, but you see that car there? Runs on gas. Might want to find some. I hear we got a barrel or two ’round these parts.

If the Perry approach is gaining traction, it’s because the administration seems unable to realize that its ideas do not work. You cannot Taser a corpse and expect it to get up and dance. You cannot help the pork-slaughtering industry if the EPA declares “squeals” to be an environmental toxin, and when the plant moves to Mexico it really doesn’t help if you announce a tax break to convert the facility to an interactive museum about the struggles of abattoir unionists. Even if Matt Damon reads the narration for the multimedia exhibit. Granted, that’s one job saved or created, but it’s not really an even swap.

#page#The jobs bill may do less of what didn’t work before. It has the same fallacies as the stimulus: Prosperity magically happens when you take money from the kulaks and hoarders, and build high-speed trains for teachers. Sure, you may say it’s an inefficacious gout of liquefied folly sloshed over the stony ground of a moribund economy, but at least it’s paid for. More or less. Sort of. It’ll cost $447 billion — not $448 billion, as some had feared — and the bulk of the money will come from curtailing itemized deductions, i.e., subsidies for the rich who donate a chair to the college library. The seat makes a whoopie-cushion razz when used by someone whose father wasn’t an alum. The CBO says the charitable-deduction limitations wouldn’t raise more than $300 billion or so, but perhaps the administration is counting on Warren Buffett settling with the IRS for the make-up money. Pass this bill!

The Rick Perry approach: That’s a half-trillion dollars y’all could spend personally on things you like. So let’s not do that.

Not to say the Perry approach is the only alternative. As we saw in the tea-party debate, Mitt Romney has a seven-part plan, which excites people who think PowerPoint presentations are always too dang short. Ron Paul has a plan that consists of yelling at paper money until it turns into shiny silver dimes, and so on. All the serious candidates are swinging axes at the status quo, not picking at gnats with tweezers. This is good. The tea party has changed the terms. A candidate can’t say he’ll keep driving the federal locomotive towards the cliff but promise he’ll ease up on the throttle and lean out of the right side of the engine instead of the left. Now it’s full stop, decouple half the cars, and scrap subsidies to develop sails to power the train. For Davy Crockett’s sake, get me some coal. Perry may not be everyone’s choice, but he’s surely the anti-Obama. Simplicity of purpose, uncomplicated disdain for egghead solutions, good humor with a dash of mean-hombre swagger — when Perry tucks his chin as he listens to a question, it’s like he’s crafting a response, but also thinking how you’d dance if he shot at your feet — these qualities smother the professorial palaver of the administration with scorn and impatience.

“Pass this bill” vs. “Get ’er done.”

In This Issue



Politics & Policy

Patently Absurd

In 1994, Claudio Ballard was an unemployed computer programmer with a great idea: a system to scan paper financial documents and store them on a secure server. Ballard built a ...

Books, Arts & Manners

Politics & Policy

Going Viral

Some of the scariest material that Stephen King has ever written — scarier, in its way, than anything in The Shining or ’Salem’s Lot or Pet Sematary — is contained ...
Politics & Policy

Bless the Beasts

Some virtues are by accidents of history associated with utopianism, hostility to private property, anti-clericalism, and other core beliefs of the Left. I can scandalize a yoga instructor anywhere in ...
Politics & Policy

A Long Red Sunset

One of the hardy staples of American history is the question of what happened to American socialism. As the only industrialized nation in the world in which avowedly socialist or ...



Proper Aim

Ask any employer, and you’ll hear the same lament: We’d love to hire people, but we need an inexplicable modification of the tax code exquisitely calibrated to provide a tiny ...
Politics & Policy


IN THESE PHOTOGRAPHS, MY RIVAL . . . grips a tapered wine glass, nearly drained, Beneath a gold band and engagement gem; Ham-fisted, left-hand fingers round the stem, Forefinger lifted, fattened with the strain. The ...
Happy Warrior


At the start of the summer, I attended a graduation ceremony in Vermont, for which a bigshot speaker had been flown up from New York. “Your world is changing so ...
Politics & Policy


The Ron Paul Movement Rides On It is not surprising that with the polls ranking him third nationally, Ron Paul would finally make the cover of National Review (“Ron Paul’s Last ...
Politics & Policy

The Week

‐ Bad news for the Democrats: It turns out some of those people who cling bitterly to their religion are Orthodox Jews in Queens. ‐ The great strength of the conservative ...
The Bent Pin

Terminal Eloquence

This column was supposed to be about presidential personality problems. I should have started writing it sooner to give myself plenty of time but I was irresistibly distracted by a ...

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

ABC Chief Political Analyst: GOP Rep. Stefanik a ‘Perfect Example’ of the Failures of Electing Someone ‘Because They Are a Woman’

Matthew Dowd, chief political analyst for ABC News, suggested that Representative Elise Stefanik (R., N.Y.) was elected due to her gender after taking issue with Stefanik's line of questioning during the first public impeachment hearing on Wednesday. “Elise Stefanik is a perfect example of why just electing ... Read More
White House

Trump vs. the ‘Policy Community’

When it comes to Russia, I am with what Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman calls the American “policy community.” Vindman, of course, is one of the House Democrats’ star impeachment witnesses. His haughtiness in proclaiming the policy community and his membership in it grates, throughout his 340-page ... Read More
Law & the Courts

DACA’s Day in Court

When President Obama unilaterally changed immigration policy after repeatedly and correctly insisting that he lacked the constitutional power to do it, he said that congressional inaction had forced his hand. In the case of his first major unilateral move — “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals,” which ... Read More
White House

Impeachment and the Broken Truce

The contradiction at the center of American politics in Anno Domini 2019 is this: The ruling class does not rule. The impeachment dog-and-pony show in Washington this week is not about how Donald Trump has comported himself as president (grotesquely) any more than early convulsions were about refreshed ... Read More

A Preposterous Review

A   Georgetown University professor named Charles King has reviewed my new book The Case for Nationalism for Foreign Affairs, and his review is a train wreck. It is worth dwelling on, not only because the review contains most of the lines of attack against my book, but because it is extraordinarily shoddy and ... Read More