Conservative politicians trying to control spending over the past few decades have become all too familiar with a tactic used by their opponents to confuse the public. Any time a politician votes to fund a program at any amount less than what their opponents have, it has been declared a cut.
Conservatives were frequently even accused of cutting programs when they had actually increased funding – just at a rate less than their liberal opponents had proposed. Expect to see this and similar tactics used quite a bit over the next few years, especially regarding the stimulus plan and jobs.
John Stossel recently wrote about the moving goalposts being used to measure success of the stimulus. He noted that in January, the administration warned that unemployment would hit 9 percent next year if its $787 billion "stimulus" wasn't passed, but the package passed and unemployment in August rose to 9.7 percent.
Stossel quoted Christina Romer, chief of the president's Council of Economic Advisers, who emphasized that 216,000 jobs lost in August were about half a million less than six months before. She did not address the fact that 700,000 jobs have been lost, but rather focused on the slowing rate of loss rather than the losses themselves.
The administration set up their own goalpost by which to measure failure – a nine percent unemployment rate. That number was exceeded when unemployment in August hit 9.7 percent, but they declared success anyway. If success is being declared when we are still losing jobs, and losing them at a worse rate than was predicted to result if the stimulus bill did not pass, it is hard to imagine any scenario in which the President would admit failure.
Several months ago I wrote about the plans of North Carolina governor Beverly Perdue to post signs proclaiming “Jobs Now” to identify projects in the state receiving stimulus money, and now we see similar public relations campaigns taking place across the country. What the signs would not and could not identify are all the private sector jobs that might have been created if not for the budget busting stimulus plan.
As President Obama declares victory for something impossible to know, pointing to jobs he has supposedly saved by spending record amounts of taxpayer money, we will also never know how many more jobs might have been saved or created without the so-called stimulus. Although there is no way to know what the jobs numbers would be right now had the stimulus bill not passed, the administration will continue to spin failure to meet their own expectations as success and most in the media will join in the celebration.
Compare that to what we saw over the past eight years. When glowing economic figures were released during the Bush years those in the media worked hard to find some glimmer of dread to put a damper on what was really good news.
When good job numbers were announced over the past eight years they were declared a disappointment if they were not as high as expected or hoped. There were even claims that we were in a recession when the economy was still growing.
Now we are seeing the reverse. Very distressing jobs numbers are being spun by the administration, and some in the media, to minimize their significance. As in the case referenced above, sometimes they are even being spun as a positive.
As confusing as the posturing, distraction and spin can be, there are real numbers to examine. Those who opposed the big spending stimulus plan and bailouts and who now hope to stop additional government control in health care and other areas should focus on those. They should point out that so far the things that were promised to result from the record spending spree have not come to pass. They should point out at every opportunity that the President is frequently pointing to fictitious numbers – as he is with the jobs he claims to have “saved.”
Right now the battle over health care and issues like cap and trade come down to a matter of trust. The Presidents’ claims cannot be trusted. If a majority realizes that, they will also realize he and the big spending liberals in Congress should not be trusted with even more of their tax dollars.
Lorie Byrd's Bio
Lorie Byrd is a stay-at-home mom from North Carolina with a passion for politics. She is a columnist for Townhall.com and a contributing editor to the Wizbang Blog.com .
Posted
10-01-2009 1:01 AM
Link to this post: