Sunday, October 21 , 2018, 6:44 am | Fair 58º


Joe Conason: Show Us the Money

Now's not the time to cut spending; what we need is a second round of stimulus funding

So often are the certitudes and pronouncements of the chattering class simply mistaken that they must always be treated with deep skepticism. That is especially true when anything important is at stake — from the arguments for invading Iraq several years ago to today’s economic stagnation. Whatever the conventional wisdom tells you must be true is almost certainly false.

Joe Conason
Joe Conason

The choral complaint emanating from every mainstream-media outlet — and the mouth of nearly every mainstream pundit — is that the federal government is spending too much and that the public will not stand for it anymore. “We must bring deficits under control!” they tell us. “The American people distrust government because spending is out of control!” they cry. Rick Santelli, the loudest mouth on the CNBC business cable channel and a revered figure in the Tea Party movement, put it most succinctly the other day when he screamed, “Stop spending!”

Cutting spending is not just bad economics; it’s bad politics, too.

Demands for the government to stop spending usually come with an asterisk and a footnote: Stop spending on everyone except me. A self-styled conservative in Congress who supposedly hates spending will vote against extending unemployment benefits, then turn around and protect federal subsidies to wealthy corporate farmers. Other conservatives will fight against increased spending on mass transit, new schools or infrastructure, while promoting bloated weapons programs that the Pentagon doesn’t even want — because the contractor has donated to their campaign or operates a manufacturing plant in their districts. Cut spending, but don’t cut spending on my priorities, no matter how wasteful.

Even if hypocrisy were not so rampant, however, the demands to slash government spending at this stage in the economic recovery are profoundly in error. While one pundit after another warns of the risks of growing deficits, none of those potential risks is imminent. Instead, the nation and the world face the risk of a renewed recession, worse than the last — just as the country sank into recession again in 1937, following the first signs of growth after the Great Depression.

Corporate investment and consumer confidence aren’t nearly strong enough to provide the number of new jobs needed — and only when employment begins to move sharply upward will revenues begin to grow and deficits start to shrink.

Cutting spending is not just bad economics; it’s bad politics, too. The Obama administration’s stimulus spending last year was just enough to prevent the Great Recession from deepening into another depression, but not nearly enough to lift the country toward a broad and full recovery. Lacking the courage of their traditional convictions, the president and his Democratic majorities in Congress tried too hard to please the Republicans, the conservatives and the Washington press corps. Trimming the stimulus too much and refusing to push hard for a second round this year has made the Democrats look weak — and left too many working families in distress.

The noisy Santelli and the publicity surrounding the Tea Party movement have fostered the misleading notion that most Americans oppose spending to put the country back to work. In fact, as Michael Lind pointed out recently in, the latest USA Today/Gallup poll shows that a substantial majority favor more spending rather than less. Published last month, that survey reported 60 percent support “additional government spending to create jobs and stimulate the economy,” with fewer than 40 percent opposed.

For Democrats hoping to stem their expected midterm losses in November, that poll contained an important message. Fully 83 percent of Democratic voters and 52 percent of independents said that they support a second round of stimulus spending — while 61 percent of Republicans were opposed. The Republicans who favor more spending, nearly 40 percent, are most likely to be white working-class males who have lost their jobs or fear losing them. Why are Democrats in Congress and the White House missing the opportunity to motivate their own base, while appealing to independents and disaffected Republican workers?

They are listening too closely to the conventional wisdom, that’s why — and as always, it is leading them in the wrong direction.

Joe Conason writes for the New York Observer. Click here for more information, or click here to contact him.

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
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.