Pixel Tracker

Monday, February 18 , 2019, 1:02 pm | A Few Clouds 57º

 
 
 
 

Joe Conason: Gov. Mitch Daniels — Bombast From the Past

Former candidate's pandering rebuttal to Obama's speech easily forgettable

Why the Republicans chose Mitch Daniels — the Indiana governor who once thrilled right-wing pundits as a 2012 hopeful — to deliver a rebuttal to President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address is puzzling. His uninspiring remarks surely killed the Daniels fad, revived lately as Republicans fret over the unappetizing choices available in their primaries.

By shining the spotlight on Daniels, the Republicans risked losing much more than a political rescue fantasy. He isn’t merely a politician who looks like an accountant; he actually was an accountant — or at least he played one during the Bush years, when he served as director of the Office of Management and Budget. Listening to him drone on about fiscal rectitude just might have reminded voters of the true source of our national problems.

“Mitch Daniels ... Isn’t he the former Bush budget director who said the Iraq War would cost $50 billion when it ended up costing $3 trillion? The bureaucrat who promoted the Bush tax cuts when we were fighting two wars? The one whose budget projections were so fraudulent that he predicted federal surpluses in 2004 and 2005? Why the hell should we listen to him criticize Obama?”

That last is a highly pertinent question, although whether most viewers could watch Daniels long enough to ask it may be doubtful. Honest economic analysis shows that the great bulk of the deficits going forward stem from spending and taxation decisions made during the Bush era, which Obama is now doing his best to remedy, by bringing troops home from Iraq and ending the Bush tax cuts.

Daniels came close to admitting that embarrassing truth when he said the president faced problems not of his making. And during the governor’s speech, there were other brief moments when he sounded as if he might want to return to the hustings as his party’s voice of reason. (That won’t happen, not only because nobody in his party wants to remember George W. Bush, but because his personal life is too peculiar to withstand media exposure.) He made a few bipartisan noises, separating himself from the most extreme anti-Obama rhetoric heard in his party.

On the whole, however, Daniels chose to assault Obama using the familiar language of the Republicans in Congress — and with equal dishonesty. There is no need to dwell at length on what he said when a few examples will suffice.

When he said the president “cannot claim that the last three years have made matters anything but worse” — and attacked the administration for spending “borrowed money” to counter the recession — he must have known that every reputable economist believes the Obama stimulus saved the country from depression.

Having written Indiana’s budget when the stimulus money arrived in his state capital, he certainly knows that without the Recovery Act, unemployment, deficits and suffering on the state and national levels would have been far worse. He took nearly $2 billion that Obama sent to Indiana — the money he said the president “borrowed and blew” — because it saved his state’s budgets and jobs, and made him look good. And he also knows that the Bush administration’s squandering of President Bill Clinton’s surplus left Obama with little choice except to borrow when the recession struck.

Daniels promised that Republicans would “level” with us about the hard fiscal facts, but he lacked the courage to admit that raising taxes will eventually be part of any realistic solution. It was certainly part of his own solution to difficulties in Indiana, where he balanced state budgets not only by using federal stimulus money, but by raising the sales tax.

He is far from the worst in his party, but he is no political savior. With nothing to lose, he could have served a real purpose by challenging his own party to confront basic facts about spending and taxes that he could not avoid as governor. He is fortunate that this political moment — and his choice of pander over candor — will be instantly forgotten.

Joe Conason writes for Creators Syndicate. Click here for more information, or click here to contact him.

Talk to Us!

Please take Noozhawk's audience survey to help us understand what you expect — and want — from us. It'll take you just a few minutes. Thank you!

Get Started >

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made using a credit card, Apple Pay or Google Pay, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments and a mailing address for checks.

Thank you for your vital support.

Become a Noozhawk Supporter

First name
Last name
Email
Select your monthly membership
Or choose an annual membership
×

Payment Information

Membership Subscription

You are enrolling in . Thank you for joining the Hawks Club.

Payment Method

Pay by Credit Card:

Mastercard, Visa, American Express, Discover
One click only, please!

Pay with Apple Pay or Google Pay:

Noozhawk partners with Stripe to provide secure invoicing and payments processing.
You may cancel your membership at any time by sending an email to .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.