Chambliss Endorses Neo-Hooverism
Senator Saxby Chambliss of Georgia has apparently decided that fiscal contraction in the face of a recession is a good idea:
Congress should do its job by working to balance the federal budget deficit, Chambliss said.
“I ran in ‘94 on a balanced budget,” he said. “We did what we said we’d do. You’ve got to have a Congress that exercises fiscal discipline.”
Amidst the “automatic stabilizers” that kick in during a recession (i.e., declining tax revenue and increased demands on public assistance programs) the only way to achieve this would be through a massive combination of tax hikes and spending cuts that would threaten to push the world on a downward spiral toward a new depression. Even the professional deficit-worriers at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget are rejecting Chambliss-style neo-Hooverism and embracing the need for Keynsian stimulus at a time when the Federal Reserve has little ability to juice growth through monetary policy.
26 Responses to “Chambliss Endorses Neo-Hooverism”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
October 21st, 2008 at 3:39 pm
I’m serious — where were these fucks the last 8 years, as record surpluses went to record deficits? And why isn’t anyone calling them on this hypocrisy?
October 21st, 2008 at 3:42 pm
Of course you know Saxby Chambliss is an idiot. This does not surprise me at all coming from him.
October 21st, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Too bad for Saxby that he’s gonna be shown the door on Nov. 4th.
October 21st, 2008 at 4:56 pm
To balance the views of Mr. Yglesias, I must point out that Fred Barnes of “The Weekly Standard” claims that increasing federal spending and maybe even tax rebates are bad because 1) states that are in shortfall have only themselves to blame and need some tough love, 2) infrastructure projects won’t get online until after the recession is over, 3) the stimulus package enacted earlier this year did nothing (according to “the empirical evidence” as he says), and 4) federal spending package will just be a bunch of liberal giveaways to favored constituencies or causes. Furthermore, Ben Bernanke shouldn’t back any fiscal stimulus policy because he can just cut interest rates and, boom, recession over.
If what you say is true, Fred Barnes is a hopeless moron. But if that is so, THEN why is he on Fox News almost everyday? Check and mate.
October 21st, 2008 at 5:40 pm
Mr. Yglesias,
This guy isn’t arguing fiscal policy, he’s positioning himself as a fiscal conservative. He wants to have his name in print saying we should balance the budget. Nevermind he was a willing participant in the mismanagement that caused this recession. Mr. Chambliss, like nearly all Republicans, could care less about the effects their policies have in the real world. Adverse outcomes are always the fault of Democrats/Liberals/Media Elites. It’s awesome when it works. Take credit for good results and blame your enemies for bad ones. He’s not interested in a debate about Keynsian versus neo-Hooverist economic policies. He’s for a balanced budget and his liberal opponent wants to expand welfare, and saddle your children with debt as far as the eye can see. Haven’t we learned anything? The way to argue with these morons is to simply say, “your President created this mess and you supported him every step of the way.” Say it over and over again and even some of voters in Georgia will get the message.
October 21st, 2008 at 7:01 pm
The neo-hooverism is a getting a bit old – you might want to let it go.
October 21st, 2008 at 9:18 pm
I remember back in 2003 working at a firm with a client who had a manufacturing plant and a new contract with DHS. DHS had put a freeze on all such contracts, and the company was in a bit of a bind. So they hired us, and we hired a lobbyist to lobby a senator to pull some strings. That senator was Chambliss.
October 21st, 2008 at 9:46 pm
“I ran in ‘94 on a balanced budget,” he said. “We did what we said we’d do. You’ve got to have a Congress that exercises fiscal discipline.”
Needless to say, most people credit the ‘balanced budget’ of the 90’s to a combination of the Dot Com Boom and Clinton’s 1993 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act for which there was not one Republican vote.
The only fiscal discipline these guys know is when daddy bailed them out at Harvard or Yale.
October 22nd, 2008 at 12:41 am
I’m sorry Matt, but can you please stop talking about Neo-Hooverism? We know it’s bad. We know that silly conservatives think they like it. We know what Herbert Hoover looks like by now. But it’s getting kind of old.
October 22nd, 2008 at 5:23 am
I still wonder why you call these people ‘neo-hooverites’ when the actual hoover raised deficit spending to a then unprecedented level. Is it ignorance or dishonesty?
October 22nd, 2008 at 5:27 am
Dishonesty. Just like the claim that Hoover was a liquidationist, so now e knowthat liquidaionism doesn’t work and shouldn’t be tried.
October 22nd, 2008 at 5:16 pm
I’ll post again, with fewer typos:
Dishonesty. Just like the claim that “Hoover was a liquidationist, so now we know that liquidaionism doesn’t work and shouldn’t be tried.”
March 2nd, 2009 at 5:55 am
levitraI want to say – thank you for this!
March 17th, 2009 at 2:35 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
tramadol
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:32 am
tramadol
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:45 am
Great site. Good info
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:27 am
It is the coolest site,keep so!
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 9th, 2009 at 8:06 am
I want to say – thank you for this! viagra