Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neeka who wrote (4682)	8/10/2003 11:16:49 PM
From: MSI	Respond to of 793777

consistent over the years in your condemnation of government in general You could say that

To: Neeka who wrote (4682)	8/11/2003 9:21:19 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793777

The good old days of gridlock In Sacramento and D.C., one-party rule opens the floodgates on spending. By TIM CAVANAUGH Columnist for Reason magazine Most Americans understand former Wyoming Sen. Alan Simpson's old joke that there are two political parties: the Evil Party and the Stupid Party. In California, though, the joke has a special poignancy because it's almost impossible to tell which one is which. On the surface, the arguments both for and against recalling Gov. Gray Davis appear airtight. Proponents of the recall argue persuasively that the governor deserves punishment for building up the largest deficit in state history, that the state Constitution provides the recall mechanism for exactly this kind of emergency, and that the probable replacement of Davis with a candidate from the Republican party - the party of "fiscal responsibility" -is the only way out of our budget crisis. Davis is the most hated governor in recent memory, and it's unreasonable to expect voters to live with such a character; indeed, if not for the almost criminal stupidity of the Republican Party in nominating Bill Simon - the one person in California who couldn't have beaten Gray Davis last year - Davis would be out of office already. The arguments against the recall also have weight. The governor was just re-elected last November. His re-election was fair and square, and no damning new information has emerged about him since. He hasn't broken any laws, and the turmoil of a recall would only exacerbate the state's crisis. In a variation on the story of the boy who kills both his parents and pleads for mercy on account of being an orphan, Democrats argue that the bankrupt state cannot afford the expense of a special election. Finally, with Darrell Issa's reputation having been savaged during the petitioning process and Arnold Schwarzenegger as indecisive as an Alpine Hamlet, the best bet for a Davis replacement may be Richard Riordan - the only person in California who couldn't beat Bill Simon in a primary. Fortunately, there is a third way of looking at the issue - by comparing the current situation in Sacramento with the current state of Washington D.C. California's $38 billion deficit is certainly damning evidence against the Democrats, who control every major elective institution in the state. But consider how the Republicans - who, in the words of Washington Post columnist Howard Kurtz, have taken over "every power center in D.C. except the Redskins" - have managed at the national level. In the Bush administration's first two years, federal spending has increased by more than 30 percent. President Bush's claim that this spending was forced on us by the unexpected war on terror is as unpersuasive as Davis' claim that nobody could have guessed the tech bust would cut into statewide revenues. Non-defense discretionary spending, for example, has been upped from $320 billion to $421 billion on the Republicans' watch; $22 billion of that was in the form of pure pork attachments to spending bills. The argument that we're still cleaning up after President Clinton's wild party is also getting harder to believe with each passing, deficit-ballooning year. Clearly, the comparison between Sacramento and D.C. shows that when it comes to fiscal responsibility, the Republicans and the Democrats are as distinct as Tweedledum and Tweedledee. But it also shows something more hopeful. It shows that a concept almost unanimously disparaged by all politicians and by most political observers is ripe for rediscovery, rehabilitation and respect. That much-maligned concept is "gridlock." Forget Hillary Clinton's national health-care fiasco. Forget the Contract With America. Forget even the impeachment of Bill Clinton. Those are all details. National politics in the 1990s had one overarching theme, and that theme was gridlock. The Republicans blocked Clinton at every turn. The health-care initiative of the early '90s was buried five fathoms deep; the welfare reform Clinton later claimed as his great achievement was driven primarily by Republican efforts. After taking control of the Congress in 1994, the GOP was relentless in its efforts to keep Clinton off balance. And Clinton gave as good as he got. Remember the heady days of 1995, when Newt Gingrich was set to lead the country into a "Third Wave" of glory? The Clinton team systematically discredited and dismantled that endeavor, with a policy of "triangulation," grandstanding and character assassinations. (Remember Gingrich's "orphanage" debacle?) California lost the power of gridlock when Gov. Wilson left office. Since then, the drumbeat of Republican incompetence and Democratic victory has led us to a situation of almost total one-party control. To focus on which party is in control misses the crucial element. The problem isn't the Democrats; it's that nobody's around to stop the Democrats. Since gridlock is not a concept that stirs voters' hearts, we are being treated to a scenario wherein a villainous, tax-and-spend Davis is being called to task by level-headed Republicans. But Davis' real sin isn't taxing and spending; it's playing the grasshopper instead of the ant. Davis didn't make hay during the sunny 1990s. He didn't rein in spending or prepare for the end of the dot-com boom. He even repealed the automobile fee, you may recall. His fiscal scrambling now that the rain has come (including, unforgivably, reinstatement of the auto fee) is worse than irresponsible; it's gauche. If you think the Republicans have the cure for such fiscal schizophrenia, take another look at Washington. Bush's tax cuts, coming at a time when the deficit is rising, do show that, unlike Davis, he is consistent in his tax policies. But his spending increases show he's no more responsible. It's time to admit that while politics produces plenty of villains, it produces no heroes. And that's not as bad as it sounds. In a pinch, a counter-villain will work just as well. Deposing Davis may not solve California's budget crisis, but learning to keep the villains fighting among themselves just might. www2.ocregister.com