I didn’t want to let New York Sen. Charles Schumer’s remark to the effect that the Democrats erred in turning their attention from the economy to enacting the PPACA in 2009 without comment since I said that back in 2009.
- The empirical evidence that the stimulus package, the ARRA, “worked” is slim to nonexistent. What the actual evidence seems to show is that the various infrastructure projects funded by the ARRA just allowed state and local governments to replace their own funding sources with federal funding.
- The recovery had already begun before the first dollar of ARRA infrastructure project spending had occurred. If you’re going to promote a Keynesian explanation for the recovery, don’t promote the ARRA. Look to the Bush Administration’s earlier stimulus efforts. I don’t think that either administration’s efforts had much effect because of their structure and timing and I think what we’ve experienced was an ordinary cyclic recovery.
- The Democrats lost the Senate because of the PPACA. Scott Brown was narrowly elected and a major reason for his victory was the PPACA.
- The ARRA should have been much more targeted. Rather than spending $800+ billion over three years for maximum effect the stimulus should have been concentrated into 2009.
- There were no shovel-ready projects in 2009. There still aren’t (at least that aren’t already approved and funded). This isn’t the 1930s. Our system just doesn’t work that way any more. The president has already acknowledged that and I don’t know why his supporters are still flogging this dead horse.
- The only practical way to get the full $800+ billion into a single year was by lifting both sides of FICA temporarily or permanently. I believe that Republican support was available for that. Can you imagine the entire Republican caucus going on record as opposing a tax cut? Me neither.
- Even its supporters acknowledge that the PPACA is a deeply flawed law and it has not received the continuous tuning that its supporters claimed it would receive but which it was obvious that it would not. In all likelihood the prospects that the PPACA will receive a major tuneup before 2024 are slim. Just as I’ve said all along. In other words the Democrats traded a more robust recovery, a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, and the House for a bad healthcare reform law that still may not pass constitutional muster.
I think that’s a pretty good list and agree on the effectiveness of ARRA. It was simply dwarfed by the countercyclical spending from automatic stabilizers, which were working in real-time to halt the contraction.
Yeah, I saw your comment over at OTB. I don’t know that I’ve ever seen anything as Panglossian as what the comments section has become there.
I didn’t see it in that article, but elsewhere I read that Schumer had called the ARRA a partial success, and I would somewhat agree with that characterization two different ways.
First, the Dems got to reward some constituencies while claiming to “do something”. So a political win, although not significant.
Second, bailing out the states wasn’t all bad. Despite claims now that no one knew how bad it was, it was clear it was epic, and cushioning the states from the worst of the immediate financial blows wasn’t terrible either. Not that this was done terribly effectively either, but Schumer did say “partial” and I did qualify* my agreement!
* Which is to say, I weasel-worded it!
Also, I don’t think we can claim this is an ordinary cyclical recovery, as we haven’t actually even got back to where we were, employment-wise, after over five years of recovery. Instead, we hit a bottom and have been bouncing along with, at best, enough employment growth to counterbalance most of population growth, though with crappier jobs.
OTB’s comments section is now identical to what I expect to see at Democratic propaganda outlet BalloonJuice. There appears to be no contortion they won’t subject themselves to in defending this President’s every word and action.
It’s hard to take issue with any of that, even to nudge it. Perhaps only with the description of normal cyclical recovery. I’d say it was attenuated and delayed due to reasons I’ve cited numerous times. I know many disagree, but my personal experiences with owners and with companies I control suggest otherwise.
As for the OTB comments section, it’s nothing now but a place to rattle some monkey cages for sport or to work off the frustrations of the day. It’s kind of like the line in an old George Carlin joke – “I’m not full…..YOU’RE full of shit.” I think it’s too bad because Doug, James and. Dr Taylor deserve better.
I must say, however, that the description Panglossian applied to Clavin and his/her henchmen is one of the most charitable I have ever seen.
Oh, and all you commenters here are stupid. Probably racists, too.
Oh, and all you commenters here are stupid. Probably racists, too
Yeah, sometimes I miss Reynolds too.
Yes, I guess I thought that was obvious. The Democratic leadership made a strategic decision when it came to the PPACA. They certainly knew, and were more than willing, to sacrifice the blue-dogs and other moderate Democrats to get the PPACA passed.
All Schumer is saying is that there was a opportunity cost and, in hindsight, that cost was pretty high for the Democrats.
I think that ideologues generally and progressives in particular are chronic miscalculators. The empirical evidence does not support their beliefs so they reject the evidence.
There was at least one shovel ready project. I was working on planning a project that had gotten state funding; we had to come up with 50%. We also had to never the project substantially completed by the end of that year. We had CD’s and were on the process of VE-ing. We applied for ARRA grant and didn’t get it. And believe me, we were genuinely “shovel ready.”