Judd Gregg Thinks The Essence of America Is Wasteful Giveaways to Corporate Lenders
Judd Gregg (R-NH) hopes on the ignorant Francophobia bandwagon rather than dealing with the administration’s budget proposals on their merits:
The president’s budget also proposes to set us on a path to nationalize the health-care system at a huge cost, and, for good measure, it throws in nationalizing the ability of people to borrow to send their kids to college. It suggests that the best way to address climate change is to create a new national sales tax on everyone’s electric bills. And, at a time when millions of Americans are struggling to find jobs, it proposes taxing small businesses, our nation’s engine of job growth, at rate that could be seen as confiscatory.
In other words, the president’s proposal is a massive and breathtaking document, and it should not be called a budget. Rather, it should be called a blueprint for the France-ification of America, a notebook for nationalization, or a memo for massive debt creation. But a budget, by any sense of the word, it is not.
I’ve dealt with France comparisons in general elsewhere. On the specifics of student loans it should of course be noted that this isn’t really a policy concern in France since instead the universities receive more generous direct funding from the state and charge dramatically lower fees. And of course this is the typical system throughout the world, and hardly a unique aspect of the French social model. More broadly, Gregg’s being coy about his own policy preferences. Obama wants to have the government spend a certain amount of money doing direct loans to students. Gregg, by contrast, wants to preserve the status quo in which the same total amount of lending takes place, but the government spends more money because the government is spending it on subsidies to private lenders. I think it would be fine to have an honest debate between proponents of a truly free market approach to student loans, which would save the taxpayers money at the cost of worse-educated and more class-bound society, and between proponents of direct lending. It would even be fine to have an honest debate between proponents of direct lending and proponents of Gregg-style crony capitalism, in which costly subsidies are doled out to favored firms. But Gregg is trying to claim the mantle of the free market while also raking in the support from business that comes from a substantive position in favor of crony capitalism. It’s nonsense.
On the rest:
– What Obama thinks is that since carbon emissions are causing climate change, the best way to curb climate change is to charge the emitters for their emissions and use the funds to cut taxes on working- and middle-class people and on subsidies for clean energy. Does Gregg have a better idea?
– There’s no plan to “nationalize the health-care system at a huge cost” in Obama’s budget. There’s a plan to spend more money in the short-run on creating a more integrated, universally affordable system in which nobody will be forced out of private sector provision of either care or insurance, in order to better control costs in the long-run.
– Gregg is not enough of a liar to actually call Obama’s tax plans “confiscatory.” But he’s way too much of a liar to describe them honestly. There’s a plan to tax the richest Americans, including those very rich Americans who are very rich because of their small business income, but not including the overwhelming majority of small businessmen who aren’t rich, at the levels they were taxed at before George W. Bush came into office.
Long story short, he could have been a heck of a Commerce Secretary.
19 Responses to “Judd Gregg Thinks The Essence of America Is Wasteful Giveaways to Corporate Lenders”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
March 12th, 2009 at 9:19 am
What the hell is he talking about? Is there some new tax I missed? Or is he just refering to the same reseting of the income tax (which will apply to individuals, not businesses) that everyone else is.
March 12th, 2009 at 9:19 am
Every time they say “France,” we say “Freedom Fries.”
March 12th, 2009 at 9:21 am
Heck of a job, Juddie.
WTF was Obama thinking?? Thank goodness Gregg saved him from himself by withdrawing. Locke is no prize, but this guy- Jebus.
March 12th, 2009 at 9:23 am
For the life of me, I can’t understand why right wingers think it sounds manly to whine about how much they hate and fear France.
March 12th, 2009 at 9:31 am
El Cid,
Because it worked so well for them in 2002 and 2003, and they’re sort of flailing about right now, trying to find something that works for them politically.
The problem is, they’re returning to the tactics that they employed to push through policies that the public is still ticked off at them for, and it’s a small matter for the Democrats to remind the public about the connection.
Judd Gregg says we can’t fight global warming because of Freedom Fries.
March 12th, 2009 at 9:57 am
you’re headlines are really good, lately
March 12th, 2009 at 10:15 am
THIS is the guy Obama wanted as part of his cabinet? Obama needs the bipartisanship dope-slapped out of him. Luckily, the Republicans are doing an excellent job of schooling him.
March 12th, 2009 at 10:23 am
THIS is the guy Obama wanted as part of his cabinet? Obama needs the bipartisanship dope-slapped out of him. Luckily, the Republicans are doing an excellent job of schooling him.
Oops…forgot to say great post! Looking forward to your next one.
March 12th, 2009 at 10:32 am
This is exactly why “bipartisanship” is bullshit. Whoever thought nominating Judd Gregg to anything was a good idea, needs to think about this.
There are two parties. They pretty squarely disagree on many enduring issues and will continue to do so. Under the democratic system, the majority rules. There are many protections for minorities in our system. Those policies which are not ruled out by those minority protections ought to be implemented as part of what being a democratic nation is all about.
March 12th, 2009 at 10:33 am
More disinformation from our betters, so that we’ll go on subsidizing their lifestyle.
They should be glad we’re not going to eat their children.
March 12th, 2009 at 10:45 am
Sen. Gregg is wrong, for all the reasons Mr. Yglesias gives above– unfortunately. For there are some of us who wish desperately that the USA would turn itself into France as soon as possible…. Or, as Albert Camus put it, “I would like to be able to love my country and still love justice.”
March 12th, 2009 at 10:58 am
Gregg should be under indictment anyway for his shady deal with his brother.
March 12th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Those policies which are not ruled out by those minority protections ought to be implemented as part of what being a democratic nation is all about.
March 12th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
“There are two parties. They pretty squarely disagree on many enduring issues and will continue to do so.”
Problem is, this assumes that the political parties are monolithic entities which are mirror images of one another. I would argue that, historically, this has not been the case. There have been many policy issues which have enjoyed broad support from both sides of the aisle. The extreme polarization of America’s political parties to ideological extremes (as we experience today) appears to be a relatively new phemonemon (say, in the last 30 years). (One could also argue, though, that this trend has affected the Republican party more than the Democratic Party, as evidenced by their recent electorical losses.)
“Under the democratic system, the majority rules.”
You may want to read up on your Tocqueville or Madison to understand why true majority rules is a Bad Idea.
March 12th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
I suspect Gregg is trying to reclaim his bona fides following his flirtation with Reality.
I think this is exactly right. I wouldn’t be surprised if Gregg is considering a run in 2012. Why else would he have agreed to be nominated for Commerce when he knew the gig and then do a very high profile withdrawal. It sure got his name in the national media in a big way and now he can claim that he was “standing on principle”. Total BS
March 12th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
This is even short-run stupid for Gregg. New Hampshire has a lot of French-Canadian voters who don’t like the demonization of everything French. The Quebec border in New York and New England is one of the few places where John Kerry in 2004 ran ahead of Al Gore in 2000.
March 12th, 2009 at 10:54 pm
Don’t they know that France built a bunch of those nuclear power plants that Republicans love so much with federal taxes?
March 13th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
@Matt C:
“You may want to read up on your Tocqueville or Madison to understand why true majority rules is a Bad Idea.”
No need. But YOU should brush up on what I posted. Could I have been more clear about the minoroty protections?
April 16th, 2009 at 10:13 pm
Just want to say i`m glad i found this site.
I am from Monaco and learning to read in English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: “Cheap airline tickets to europe travel to europe trip to europe flight to europe we already selling airline extended fares tickets on airplane.”
THX :p, Iratze.