We are at the Crossroads. Last chance out will be sometime next spring. Democrats may well be run over if they don't effectively move soon. Let me offer a compromise with the forces of inertia - with the fear that we might act too rashly in moving too fast or far.
Passing health care would be a great accomplishment for this President. For one thing the insincere refrain about his lack of accomplishments would end abruptly. Then many of his critics would really be concerned because the last thing they want is anything accomplished by this administration. But whether or not it passes this effort for health reform has achieved one thing clearly. The most ambitious part of these reforms is a public option. The public is convinced that such a change would be an improvement according to recent polls from CNN, Pew. Kos and others. That was just not clearly the case at the end of health reform last time out when the more ambitious parts of health reform were not accepted by most according to the polling just before those reforms defeat. Regardless of outcome most Democrats will not suffer from the disposition of health care reform that includes a public option because, unlike last time, the public is on the side of the most ambitious part of the plan. If such an option is defeated conservatives will suffer more losses than liberals over the issue.
Don't get me wrong. If health reform passes I will be tickled far beyond pink. It will be the greatest positive accomplishment in American politics for several decades. But great accomplishments are forgotten quickly when allowances for children's clothing is inadequate or heating bills can't be paid.
There will be a more compelling issue soon that already has the public in a tight grip. Left to fester is a 10% unemployment rate. Only one kind of politician survives 10% unemployment - the kind that has a plan the public believes is best to improve job markets.
I am not primarily here to argue macro-economics. Experts can be found claiming our current nightmarish level of unemployment will be over soon. I do not agree with their reasoning given our diminished consumer capacity to pull ourselves up by our bankrupt bootstraps. But this controversy is not only moot but not necessarily relevant to this post which is about elections and not future debatable employment trends which change things materially after the next election. If we are saved soon but soon is past next year then soon is too late to save a robust Democratic Congress.
The public might love the health reforms enough to make some difference. Of course high unemployment and loved policies or politicians are no sure winner of elections. There was no better lauded politician than England's Winnie after World War II's singular accomplishments for that singular politician. But Winnie had the small problem of a souring economy in the bombed out cities of England. Even with his accomplishments he lost decisively to a man whom most found quickly forgettable. Does anyone remember Clement Attlee
Things could, of course, improve without further government action. If they have by next spring...well - never mind as the Church Lady says. But if they haven't Democrats need to do more. Blaming Beelzebub Bush probably won't be enough. Not that it will do that dark side GOP any good but such recriminations are not a plan for the future and won't be decisive in many elections. Nor will putting a smiley face on a killing level of unemployment. A smiley face on unemployment includes saying we can't do anything to change unemployment so just don't worry and be happy. A smiley face on unemployment includes claiming we already passed a law two years ago outlawing unemployment. Both those arguments are sure election losers no matter how true they are. Two year old laws are not going to suffice and neither is a declaration of defeat and an admission that the last (and to many eye inadequately crafted ) stimulus was doomed since as the cynics maintain nothing government can do will change our misery.
But let me offer an olive branch to those who truly see a half full cup in the economic tea leaves. Unemployment could get worse, better or stay stable at this horrific level. Crystal balls are not perfected for economic forecasts yet. If things don't improve it will be disastrous and rather than stake all on uncertain prophecy why not hedge the bet. Lets do something now that MIGHT be needed to stave off disaster and lets reduce our efforts, as politics might require, if unemployment improves. Let's ready the spending to create energy infrastructure directly by having the government build wind farms to be leased for what will likely in short order be seen as a song to whatever private energy companies will be the highest bidders. Lets make existing utilities share the cost and use of their transmission lines to potentially new players if fossil fueled plant owners refuse to bid or lose. That's a loss leader for a green economy and more importantly a potential jobs monster since we could utilize an unemployment killing mountain of such farms. And lets build and improve more roads ( In this red state where roads are a joke I guarantee we need to spend a lot more on roads than currently budgeted. ) Those are the kinds of projects we have needed for a long time. This time the government needs to directly create wind farms and co-ordinate road projects with but for the state road systems as well as new federal highways because we need these jobs fast.
But in case the optimists are right we can also appropriate enough to start turning the unemployment rate we didn't expect in 2008 around faster. If unemployment improves we can start taking a much longer time to finish the projects but until it does the optimists need to realize they have been wrong about what is surely by it's unemployment rate now an official depression and they might be wrong about their expectation of improvement.
The reason we might want to reduce the spending on such plans is to avoid labor induced wage inflation or capital market distortions resulting in higher interest rates. Briefly both are overblown concerns. Increased productivity of workers makes wage inflation a very dead horse and when public monies effectively make people employed long term by becoming infrastructure vital to expanding an economy they don't create long term debt they reduce it. The spending relative to the size of the economy of the 30's and 40's was far higher than anything since then and that debt quickly became surplus in the 50's and led to the most massive increase in prosperity in human history over the next generation.
Both the conservatives bugaboos about debt are so far removed from current realities that we must surely only accommodate conservatives who have made inflation a fetish in economics which has obviously been unnaturally attended since the death of the Phillips curve in the 1980's and it's continued morbidity under Clinton. We can accommodate them with a timed reduction in spending after unemployment improves. Such projects would be a tremendous boon to the general economy. Money spent to make roads or green energy is an investment with real returns - not a money pit. But if we must accommodate the conservatives that is the way to do it!
The other politician of note around the time of Winnies defeat died in office. His memory kept his then unloved successor in office longer than Truman's own popularity warranted. Roosevelt did everything he could to end unemployment. If he hadn't the democrats would not have won in 1948 - they would have suffered the same defeat as Winnies party. When a polity is watching employment policy as close as ours is you must do everything possible to end our current level of misery. If they fail to act Congress Democrats will be ending their own jobs. and leaving policy to the philosophers of greed who brought us these intractable problems.
We have only fear to fear. We must not let it paralyze us. We are at the Crossroads and we need to take a car out by next spring!!!