"And All the King's Men"

Sydney M. Williams

Thought of the Day

“And All the King’s Men”

July 12, 2011

There have always been differences among those we send to Washington. But when it came to the best interests of the Country, ideology generally gave way to practicality; each side would be satisfied that, while not receiving a full loaf, no one would go hungry.

President Obama, however, has couched the budget battle in terms of a moral crusade. He speaks of “fairness’, of “millionaires and billionaires” who ride around in private jets, but who are not paying their fair share of revenues. Republicans respond by pointing out that the burden of paying for the entitlements we promised retirees today falls unfairly on the shoulders of our children and grandchildren. And it does, because declining birth rates have shrunk the number of workers for each retiree. The President fails to acknowledge that 59% of tax receipts now come from the 5% who are the highest earners. Arthur Brooks of the American Enterprise Institute asks: “If our system is not yet ‘fair,’ what will make it so?” Should they contribute 75% or 95% of receipts? Mr. Brooks points out: “Even if individuals earning more than $200,000 were taxed at a 100% marginal rate…the take would come to $1.27 trillion, or just 77% of this year’s deficit.”

Republicans hurt their cause, in my opinion, when they speak as though they alone are capable of interpreting what the founders meant when they wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, especially when they speak with righteous, Christian indignation. The fact is we live in a fluid society, immersed in an ever-changing world. The role of government should not be to protect the people against change, but to prepare them for it.

Fairness is permitting people equal opportunity. It speaks to the need of better education and of the importance of stability in the home. Fairness, as Abraham Lincoln once said is allowing “the humblest man an equal chance to get rich with everybody else.” As a rich society, we look upon poverty with despair, but unfortunately there will always be those less well off than others. Society will always be tiered. It is the ability to move up and down the ladder that matters. We are all different in myriad ways – looks, ambition, intelligence, health, emotional maturity – so, no matter the opportunities, outcomes will never be equal.

Our political system has become hampered by the fact that Washington is in perpetual campaign mode. The winners of the 2010 election were no sooner sworn into office, when the 2012 campaign began. It is exhausting for the public, as it must be for those who are constantly running. We all receive e-mails pleading for political donations. They arrive with the threat that should the cited candidate lose, democracy risks disappearing down the drain. Why not a system that sends men and women to Washington for a limited time, which then requires them to re-enter private life – to live the way the rest of us do?

There was a time when differences among party leaders seemed more subtle, less distinctive, less iconoclastic with fewer ragged edges. Politicians once campaigned for office from the fringes, but governed from the center, or at least nearer the center. Those times are now remembered nostalgically. The two parties appear to have been hijacked by extremists who negotiate in the Press while appealing to the fanatics on the fringes. In an ideal world we would all be better served when leadership – in Congress and the White House – were more moderate. But we get what we deserve, for that is what democracy is all about. If we don’t like it, we can throw the bums out. The problem: incumbency carries enormous financial weight.

The financial crisis struck four years ago. By the fourth quarter of 2007 we entered recession, which did not end until the spring of 2009 – two years ago. Unemployment, at 9.2%, is higher today than it was when the recession ended. If we include the underemployed, the discouraged and those who no longer receive unemployment benefits, the real number is closer to 20%. What’s wrong with this picture? The President tells us we “must eat our peas,” and he is concerned about the use of incandescent light bulbs? Government spending, as a percent of GDP, is at a sixty year high – a result of a stimulus that did not stimulate. Tax revenues are at a sixty year low – a function of an economy that is not functioning and a tax code whose nominal rates are too high and whose complexities benefit the very wealthy. Should taxes be raised, without reform, Warren Buffett and GE will simply hire more tax lawyers. Neither will pay higher taxes.

There are those who suggest Mr. Obama is too cautious, that he “leads from behind.” In my opinion his problem is simply that he has little understanding of how the private sector works. It is an affliction common to those who spend their entire lives in the public sector. In yesterday’s press conference, he tellingly spoke of himself and the income he made off his books. He spoke of how government allowed him to keep income he did not need – allowed him to keep? To whom does the income belong? To government? Mr. Obama made his money writing books. Those who make their living through manufacturing or providing services understand the competitive nature of the market place, and the fact that income leads to investment and investment leads to job creation. (Not surprisingly, business investment this cycle has lagged previous cycles.) Government does not own us and dole out allowances. Government exists because we the people find it necessary for the society in which we choose to live.

The farce that is being played out in Washington is dismaying. In 2008 we experienced a financial meltdown. Government interceded and prevented a domino-like collapse. That was good; though there are those who caused the collapse (particularly members of Congress and their boys at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) who have never been called to account. We were also in recession and, in that case, government has done very little that has worked. In fact they may have hindered the private sector’s natural instinct to survive and thrive.

Watching this slow motion movie play out – with each team playing to the applause of their own audience – and knowing that Humpty Dumpty had a great fall, the fear is that no one is serious about putting him back together.

………………………………………………………………………..

I will be out traveling on Wednesday.