“You cannot restore the fiscal integrity and competitive posture of this state unless you do three things: first, reduce state spending in absolute dollar terms; second, renegotiate state employee benefit arrangements in a manner that is fair to employees, retirees and the taxpayers who must pay the tab; third, right size state government and revise its operational practices. We also need to engage in regulatory relief and tax reform and other actions, but these three actions are critical.”
That is Dave
Walker, speaking more or less off the cuff. This is standard conservative –
i.e. Chicago School – economic doctrine.
A Republican running for Lieutenant Governor, Mr. Walker
does not pull his punches. But because he is vying for a position comparable to
John Nance Garner’s colorful description of the office of the Vice President,
the punches land softly on the opposition. Mr. Garner, Franklin Roosevelt’s
Vice President, once described his largely ceremonial duties in scatological
terms that would be frowned upon even today: He said of the Vice Presidency-- “It
isn’t worth a warm bucket of spit.” Cleaned up by the usual Puritans, this is
how Mr. Garner's estimation of the VP office has come down to us. Mr. Garner had not
mentioned “spit” but rather another unmentionable body fluid.
Within the state, the lieutenant governor’s position is
comparable to that of the Vice Presidency. Some people think it’s not worth
much more than Mr. Garner's estimation of his own position. The Lieutenant
Governor, like the Vice President, is at the beck and call of the chief
executive; he presides over the legislature when it is in session and may
decide split votes, a remote possibility in Connecticut’s one-party state. The
Democratic hegemony in the state’s General Assembly is longstanding, and
Democrats now control the chief executive office for the first time in
twenty-three years. Republicans are within striking distance in the Senate, and
some polls indicate that the gubernatorial slot may be up for grabs.
Mr. Walker is highly overqualified for the position he is
seeking. Asked why he is not running for
governor, he tips his hat genteelly to precedence. It is very unusual, not to
mention ungracious, in Connecticut politics for newcomers to successfully storm
the Bastille. The normal practice is to wait your turn in the usual line of
succession.
Because the position is not an appointive one, Lieutenant
Governors run independently of governors, which means that the governor
occasionally may be yoked with a partner whose political vision is at cross-purposes
to his own. When Governor Jodi Rell,
herself a Lieutenant Governor, stepped into former Governor John Rowland’s
empty shoes, her Lieutenant Governor for a time was, by the luck of the draw,
Kevin Sullivan, a Democratic Party stalwart who served in the slot for three
years before being replaced by Republican Michael Fedele. Because the
Lieutenant Governor position traditionally has been for the most part worth
little more politically than a warm bucket of spit, the Democratic Party
interloper was not able to do permanent damage to Mrs. Rell, still the most
popular governor of the last four, including Governor Dannel Malloy, whose
popularity ratings during his first term in office may accurately be termed
worth little more than a warm bucket of spit.
Mr. Malloy’s problem is more than the economy -- stupid. The
national economy recovered from the Great Recession three years ago,
but Connecticut has not, and it is instructive to ask why.
The “Great Recession” was caused chiefly by the bursting of
the housing mortgage bubble. If President Barrack Obama had dedicated his first
term in office to an effort to restore the bruised housing market, Mr. Obama,
and all Democrats running for office this year, would have been untouchable.
But Democrats, following Mr. Obama’s lead, decided instead to reach for a rusty brass
ring that had been clanking around in the progressive attic since the days of
Eugene Debs – universal health care. Obamacare, one of its variants, is simply
a baby step in the direction of a universal healthcare system, a Veterans
Administration for the nation at large. The result was, and is, chaos and
progressive economic anarchy.
Crises, however, are the sort of thing that energize
progressives. Here in Connecticut, and elsewhere in the nation, progressives
have employed such crises to corral special interests – women persecuted by Republicans,
unions, academia, sloppy thinkers in the media, African Americans imprisoned in
wondrously gilded welfare cages, Latinos used to quasi-socialist political
systems in their home countries, permanently duped molecular Democrats – and so
advance their own cause. The watchword of progressive musclemen is: Never let an
artificially caused crisis go to waste, and any crisis that does not enhance
electability is wasteful.
In “Democracy” -- a novel by Henry Adams, begun in London in
1867 but published anonymously much later in 1880; Adams had instructed his publisher to bring the novel
out on April Fool’s Day -- one of the supporting characters, possibly speaking
on behalf of Mr. Adams himself, describes the Washington D.C. scene, even then,
during the post-Civil War period, full of lobbyists and cagey congressional
incumbents, this way: “The government of the United States is a government of
the people, by the people, and for the Senators.”
And THAT is the problem.
No Republican in Connecticut has thus far articulated the
problem compellingly. But Mr. Walker has come close. Proper articulation is the
first step in problem solving.
Comments
-----
God Bless Walker (and McKinney).
I appreciate Gov-manque Pelto's forthright exposure of the Nutmeg governance fraud, but forcibly extracting more revenue from "the rich" to fix the honestly-analyzed budget failure is both wrong and ultimately impractical. Both our Federal and our State governments are running up debt at a rate that is simply unsustainable with any imagined taxing. (The left seems to think unsustainable is somehow different than not being able to pay for it. Who cares about sustainability as long as we keep increasing revenue?)
But, there is something afoot in Dem-witted political theorizing. Both our Bill Curry and the Abominable Mrs. Klinton have recently discovered that their party has lost its soul. It should be more like Ralph Nader or Jonathan Pelto; ideologically honest, ethically upright, and more solicitous of the wants of the People . The trouble is that the reason our spending is out of control is that the Dem Party has since 1932 operated without regard for Constitutional limits. Their pursuit of social justice through demagoguery, their kissing of the ass of the donkey masses, is disrespectful of the self-governing People. But, can the Dems not look around the place, acknowledge all the good their rational policies have accomplished, and simply pay for and operate the machine they've created? No way; they are having a dream in which they are forever marching on against the interminably bitter clingers.
Still, its not a bad thing to have Democrats acknowledge that they don't know who they are, what they are doing, or even what they want.
----------
Curry:
If Democrats can’t break up with Obama or make up with Nader, they should do what they do best: take a poll. They would find that beneath all our conflicts lies a hidden consensus. It prizes higher ethics, lower taxes and better governance; community and privacy; family values and the First Amendment; economic as well as cultural diversity. Its potential coalition includes unions, small business, nonprofits, the professions, the economically embattled and all the marginalized and excluded. Such a coalition could reshape our politics, even our nation.
------
"We have to go back out and sell ourselves," Clinton said. "It is not to be taken for granted. What do we stand for and, how do we intend to lead and manage? How do we try to enlist the rest of the world in this struggle between cooperation and order and conflict and disorder which is really at the root of so much that's going on today, and i don't think we've done a very good job of that...We spend a lot of money and a lot of time and effort trying to be influential around the world when I think we would be able to succeed more effectively if we were clearer about who we are and what we stand for and the values that we hold."
---------
Curry's piece at "Salon" is really quite pitiful. It brings to mind that old Bob Dylan lyric about one Mr. Jones who knows something is happening, but he doesn't know what it is. Reading Curry one gets the impression that the Party hasn't done well in recent elections; that the country isn't blessed with pseudo-Keynesian deficits, quasi-nationalized healthcare, the Dodd-Frank elimination of "too-big-to-fail," gay marriage, and global climate control through eradication of U.S. fossil fuel extraction and use; not to mention an exquisitely egalitarian immigration "policy."
The reason for the Dem failure, according to Curry is that they don't like the People, and therefore have no ideas. The Dems have become corrupt, or at least unethical, because of their love of money. Obama's "longest list of unkept promises is the one titled 'ethics and open government.'” But, unlike Ralph Nader, Curry doesn't call for the impeachment of the President. For him Obama's failure is not a gross and serial violation of law, fundamental and statutory, but his embrace of Wall Street and K Street.
I don't claim to have read the entire piece, but one thing that strikes me about it is its reference to the Constitution zero times. He's committed to a teleocratic government, to a government that "gets things done," without limits other than perceived goodness of policy. One would think he'd celebrate the progress the Dems have made in transforming the country into such a teleocracy, not to say a banana republic led by nit-wit autocrats.
-------------
When it comes to the current president, Nader said that Obama has violated the Constitution on several occasions and should be impeached.
"Oh, most definitely," Nader said when asked if Congress should bring forward articles of impeachment against Obama. "The reason why Congress doesn't want to do it is because it's abdicated its own responsibility under the Constitution."
-----
Curry:
"We’re in crisis because of all our broken systems; because we still let big banks prey on homeowners, students, consumers and retailers; because our infrastructure is decrepit; because our tax code breeds inefficiency and inequality; because foreign interventions bled us dry. We’re in peril because our democracy is dying. Reviving it will take more than deficit spending and easy money. It will take reform...
(But Democrats) don’t believe in ideas because they don’t believe in
Bill Buckley had him on Firing Line once or twice. When they later met – I think at the Hartford Library, where Bill was performing – Mr. Curry was running for governor against John Rowland. Mr. Buckley approached him, smiled that world conquering smile of his, warmly grasped his hand and said “I plan to vote against you, with the greatest reluctance.”
Here’s something on the Nader-Curry romance: http://donpesci.blogspot.com/2011/01/nader-hearts-curry-harpoons-dodd.html