Mitt Romney is running the classic outsider
campaign. He is not a creature of Washington, he
says. He is a product of business world,
the world of profit, loss and risk. He
comes from the “real world”. He will lean
upon this experience to reform how government operates. Entrepreneurs must
adapt to survive. Romney will adapt our
system of government so it can survive in the big, bad global dog-eat-dog
economy. His guiding principle will be
“WWBOD (What Would a Business Owner Do)?”
In one of Mitt Romney’s most recent speeches in Michigan, he said: “This
is a time for new ideas, new answers and a new direction. That is the only way
that our future can be better than the past.”
That is reassuring. He is running on a platform of change and
hope. I am glad to hear that he believes
that old ideas, old answers, and the old direction would not work in the new
economic world order. At least it sounds
as if he would therefore reject any of the ideas that put us in this position
in the first place.
So what are his creative business solutions to
the vexing problems we face as a nation?
What does his business acumen suggest would be the correct actions? What would he do that the last GOP President
and last GOP controlled Congress didn’t try?
If we decide to vote for him, we have a right to know, don’t we?
Here’s the Romney plan: Lower taxes on the wealthy. Deregulate.
Outsource to defense contractors.
Gut social programs. Handicap
labor.
Not so creative and not so new.
These are the new solutions that he learned in
the world of business? I’m sorry, these
sound more like empty platitudes design to win conservative votes without
divulging real policy prescriptions. At
the risk of showing my age, I am wondering, “Where’s the beef?” These prescriptions are exactly what the GOP
has pushed for decades, nothing more, nothing less. And they have been tried. Economic success did not trickle down and
deregulation ended up contributing to corporate fraud and abuse.
Maybe being a successful businessman makes you
good at running a business focused on shareholder value and profitability. It could be that being a successful
businessman gives you a jaded and unrealistic viewpoint on what it takes to
successfully lead a country not devoted to profit maximization at the expense
of competition. Really, if we are
threatened by China,
should we attempt a leveraged buyout or worse, a hostile takeover?
Paul Waldman writes that Romney’s “trust me, I’m
a businessman” approach boils down to a simple leap of faith for the electorate
- can you trust that someone who has been successful in one area of his life
(given his wealthy head start, not to be confused with a healthy Head Start) can
translate that success to another area of his life. Is success in business a guarantee of success
in government?
I don’t know the answer to that question,
although Herbert Hoover ran on his business experience, and that didn’t work
out too well. George W. ran a business
and he did a heck of a job running the economy…into the ground. What I do know is that in order to consider
Mitt Romney for President, we’ll need to know more than “trust me, I got this”.
From his Michigan
speech:
“New
and emerging small businesses and so-called gazelle, or fast-growing, businesses
will spring up across the country by instituting pro-growth regulations,
pro-growth taxes, pro-growth intellectual property protections, and pro-growth
labor policies.”
Pro-growth
regulations - Translation: Screw the environment and buyer
beware; the invisible hand of market forces will protect the consumer in the
brave new world of self-regulating markets (further translation – if your Ford
Pinto explores upon a rear end collision, don’t worry. People will eventually stop buying Pintos and
the company will go out of business.)
Pro-growth
taxes - Translation: Reduce tax rates on the wealthiest 1% even lower than
they are today and convince voters that this tax savings for the wealthiest
converts them into ‘job creators’ when this is factually inaccurate and wildly
misleading. Also used as a sneaky way to
raise taxes on the poorest citizens and encourage them the value of work by
mandating productivity increases that equate to asking workers to create bricks
without straw.
Pro-growth
intellectual property – Translation: I have no idea what he is talking
about, and will assume that this is code targeted towards a particular class of
potential campaign donors.
Pro-growth
labor policies – Translation: Eliminate the right of workers to
collectively bargain and return our great nation to those glory days when an
employer could look you in the eye and say with confidence, “Get back into the
shop, you lazy bum. You’re lucky to even
have a job. Secretary of Labor Gingrich
has millions of 10 year old kids ready to step in and do your job for pennies
on the dollar so hold your water and stop grousing about that asbestos dust.”
Don’t hold your breath waiting for the details to
refute my version, though. Romney would
rather remain a blank screen upon wish the electorate projects their own
impressions:
“So I think it’s important for me
to point out that I anticipate that there will be departments and agencies that
will either be eliminated or combined with other agencies... So will there be
some that get eliminated or combined? The answer is yes, but I’m not going to
give you a list right now.”
His
penchant for vagueness is becoming the stuff of legend. He has put forth a tax plan, but it cannot be
scored by the CBO because it lacks details.
His answer to that dodge is that Congress would work out the
specifics. He advocates a new direction
in Afghanistan,
but will not tell us what direction he favors.
“Before I take a stand at a particular course of action, I want to get
the input from the people who are there.”
Maybe the best description of Mitt isn’t the
Etch-A-Sketch candidate. Maybe he’s the
Mad-Libs candidate. His policies have
the vague outline of a story, but it is up to others to fill in the wacky
nouns, verbs and adjectives that will really make us laugh. If it is former Bush advisors and former GOP
nomination rivals throwing in those nouns, verbs and adjectives, the narrative
might get out of hand.
If we’re not careful, we might laugh so hard at
the result, we'll cry.
No comments:
Post a Comment