The Republicans’ latest stratagem is to argue that the cuts in discretionary spending that will kick-in when the Sequester hits us next Friday will be insignificant and cause no noticeable damage to anyone. I suppose this represents a little momentum for intellectual consistency from people who have been telling us for years that Keynesian Economics don’t work and that the government is spending too much money on social programs. If government spending can’t create jobs then slashing spending can’t destroy them. And if we are wasting money on social programs then people don’t actually need those programs. Of course, both arguments are the stupidest nonsense.
The advantage we have in this argument is that it will not be resolved by the relative success of both parties’ talking points and spin, but by the response of the American people. It is assumed in Republican circles that their politicians are in safe seats and that they can easily absorb a big dip in their popularity and come out unscathed. They ought to remember that scene from the second presidential debate when the president told Mitt Romney to “please proceed” with his erroneous argument about the administration’s response to the Benghazi attacks. If the president isn’t slamming his fist on the table to get them to avoid the Sequester, perhaps he knows something that they don’t. Sure, he would like the Republicans to strike a reasonable deal to avoid the Sequester, but he has no worries about who will suffer politically if they do not.
This has led some in the press to blame the president for not showing more urgency even as they argue in the next breath that the House won’t accede to anything the president suggests. But you can’t have it both ways, and “urgency” is relative anyway. The president has made the same case for three years. He will agree to large cuts in return for modest revenues. He will give a lot to get a little. The Republicans, in turn, have maintained for three years that they will give absolutely nothing and that all their demands must be met or the economy gets it in the head.
That some of them are now arguing that the bullet wound to the cerebellum won’t actually hurt or cause any lasting damage is kind of a joke.
