I have a theory. The news has become reality TV. Here's why. On reality TV they often have thousands upon thousands of hours of footage. No real human being has a life that follows a narrative and makes an interesting story that can be expressed in 30 minute segments once a week. So they make a narrative for each "character" and then find the footage to back it up. One person's a slut, another one's an evil bitch, whatever.
Well... with the stimulus debate, it seems like that's exactly what the news has become. Find the narrative and go with it - whether or not it's true. It might be totally fucking false and even bad for the country, but it makes for some good TV.
To follow through with my promise on George W. flavored ice cream - Navajo sent me an email forward on the topic. Apparently Ben & Jerry's had a contest to name a flavor and they shared their top responses. I don't know if it's true, but I also don't care - it's FUNNY. My favorite? Heckuva Job, Brownie!
The stimulus bill is no laughing matter. Not if you like things like jobs and food and shelter. It's not about political wins or losses, it's not about ideology. It needs to be about stimulating our mess of an economy ASAP. I've written up what Campaign for America's Future has proposed as the Main Street Recovery Plan. They estimate $900 billion as the FLOOR - not the ceiling - of what we need to spend to make this work.
In short, we need jobs. It's not a handout or an entitlement. It's putting money into the economy but also giving people meaningful work experience and self-respect at the same time.
Investment is another key term. Not like investing in the stock market, but investing in our country. When you invest, you are getting something in return for your spending. It's not like the money we gave to the banks that we'll never see again. When we repair roads and bridges or educate students, we will employ construction workers and teachers but we'll also have a better, stronger country as a result.
So, where are we now? Well, the Republicans started out by ridiculing "wasteful spending." I believe I heard them laughing at plans to build bike paths. In my mind, bike paths are anything but wasteful. They help to move us off oil and they provide jobs. They also improve our health - assuming people will bike more and drive less once a bike path is put in nearby.
So then the Blue Dogs got on board with the "we don't want wasteful spending" mantra. Now - this is dumb in reality because the estimate I've heard is that less than 1% of the stimulus was so-called wasteful spending and that all of that was removed by the time the bill reached the Senate. But it makes good TV. It's a narrative. "Why won't the Senate agree to pass the bill? Well, they don't want wasteful spending."
So today they came up with a compromise. If you are following the TV narrative, wouldn't you assume that they got the wasteful spending out of the bill?
But what did they cut?
Head Start, Education for the Disadvantaged, School improvement, Child Nutrition, Firefighters, Transportation Security Administration, Coast Guard, Prisons, COPS Hiring, Violence Against Women, NASA, NSF, Western Area Power Administration, CDC, Food Stamps
Let's look at this from 2 points of view. One - total fucking moral bankruptcy. Two - ability to stimulate the economy.
About number one - I don't think I need to say much. Violence against women funding is wasteful? Head Start is wasteful? What the fuck. NASA? Well, OK. Cut NASA. But food stamps? Food prices are rising six times faster than inflation in general, and it's harder and harder to make ends meet with the already insufficient food stamps benefits. So we shouldn't give food stamps recipients more money??? Food banks are being overrun. They are empty. People need to eat.
But in this case I think it's even more important to point out number two. If the bill is supposed to stimulate the economy - something that all of us, rich and poor alike, need - then we should make sure the bill stimulates the economy. And the best way to do that? Food stamps. They work far better than tax cuts, far better than refund checks, even better than infrastructure spending.
So here's something that's really sticking in my craw. It's an email I got from National Sustainable Agriculture Campaign:
Some leading anti-hunger and school food groups are pressing the Senate to put major funding into school dinner programs (for aftercare programs) and they remain silent or nearly silent on WIC funding. From their internal strategic standpoint, they assume the shortfall for WIC will be made up in the regular FY 2009 agricultural appropriations bill and that if the offset for that extra money is cuts to farm bill programs for conservation, specialty crops, organic, beginning farmers, renewable energy and the like, that is our problem, not their problem. Broad progressive public interest alliances on food, farm, hunger, rural development, and conservation issues, once upon a time alive and well, appear to remain dormant.
Here's what's going on. WIC stands for Women, Infants, and Children and it's similar to food stamps but not identical. One difference is that it's NOT an entitlement. Food stamps is. No matter how many people ask for food stamps, they are never told "Sorry, we're over budget... none for you even though you qualify." For WIC, that could actually happen. When the budgeted money is gone, it's gone.
Right now, the money for WIC is coming up short. That makes no sense to me, because when is feeding hungry children EVER not a good choice? It should be an entitlement. But anyway - instead of including WIC in the stimulus, I don't think they are. It seems that it will be funded later - at the expense of other needed programs (like conservation programs). That just pisses me off.
In other words - once you look inside the actual facts of the stimulus debate, the idea that they are cutting wasteful spending is bullshit. The idea that the bill is too large is bullshit. The idea that we should focus on tax cuts alone is bullshit. Our bridges our collapsing, our schools are badly in need of money, and people are hungry. If I am remembering right from Rachel Maddow a few days ago, there are about $3 trillion in infrastructure projects that we need in America - and far less than that budgeted for it in the stimulus.
But what are these motherfuckers saying now that they are patting themselves on the back after cutting $80 billion in needed spending out of the bill? Here's a cute little quote from Sen. Ben Nelson:
"We trimmed the fat, fried the bacon and milked the sacred cows."
The media has given us a good story. They made it a compelling debate between the different sides of the aisle, complete with a happy ending. But what did that accomplish, other than good TV? If the entertainment we're getting on the news comes at the expense of fixing the economy, that's a very bad deal.