GOP puts election ahead of consensus

“Jobs Plan Tanks,” screamed the Drudge Report the morning after the president’s much anticipated jobs speech. The headline linked to reports of the drops on the various stock markets, which are based, it appears, as much on global uncertainty as they are on the support, or lack thereof, of the president’s plan.

But does it matter?

The problem with building expectations is that -- whether you are a candidate or a president or a football coach -- you almost never meet them. That’s why the usual game is to hype things down rather than up so that you can do better than expected or, to borrow from Bill Clinton, the best politician I’ve ever met, assume the mantle of “the Comeback Kid.” Which is precisely what Barack Obama needs.

In truth, the reaction was predictable. The logical recourse for a president seeking to create jobs is to spend money -- either by appropriating it or by forgoing it in tax cuts. When I was in law school, legendary tax professor Stan Surrey taught us that tax cuts had to be viewed, in fiscal terms, as being no different from appropriations. “Tax expenditures” he called them. Conservatives, led by President Reagan and his Office of Management and Budget Director David Stockman, never bought it. Invoking JFK’s 1960s tax cuts, they managed to convince the country that you could cut taxes and increase spending without increasing the deficit.

It didn’t work that way, and years later, Stockman admitted that he never quite bought it even when he was doing it.

Last month, when the president proposed closing tax loopholes that benefit corporate America and letting the supposedly temporary Bush cuts for the richest Americans lapse, Republicans screamed bloody murder. And to the consternation of many liberals, the president backed down. Last week, when he proposed tax breaks for businesses that create jobs or raise wages, as well as new spending for infrastructure repair, they screamed bloody murder about the impact on fiscal policy. Go figure.

The short answer is that the Republicans aren’t going to do anything to help this president, at least when it comes to economic policy. They’ll never admit that their goal is to keep those unemployment numbers high, to wreak havoc with markets, to undermine the confidence that is necessary to any recovery. In fairness, their strategy makes perfect sense. Their goal is to put a Republican in the White House, and sadly, from a policy perspective, the easiest way to do that is by keeping the bread and butter off the table and the chicken out of every pot.

What became clear Thursday night is that the president is not going to win this election by seeking consensus in Washington, no matter how good his speeches are. If he couldn’t get a deal on the deficit without looking both arrogant and weak, he isn’t going to get a deal to pass his budget initiatives.

Voters say they want consensus, but if Obama tries to deliver it, he will lose. Which leaves the other option: picking fights, staking your presidency on what you believe in, being willing to put a marker in the sand, even if it stays there. In times like this, the only way to win the presidency may be to put it at risk in no uncertain terms. What Obama needs more than a good and balanced plan is a good and meaningful fight.

© 2011 Creators Syndicate