Ross Douthat thinks he’s found the secret to the President’s eventual success:
What Obama does have, though, is an atmosphere of crisis and a massively-unpopular opposition party, which grants him an unparalleled political opportunity to pass whatever spending the Democratic Party likes, and damn the short-term cost. And what you see in his budgeting proposals, I think, is the liberal equivalent of the conservative attempt to “starve the beast.” In both the Reagan and Bush eras, Republicans passed tax cuts and ran up large deficits while hoping that by starving the federal government of revenue they would curb its long-run growth. Obama’s spending proposals would effectively reverse that dynamic – they would create new spending commitments and run up large deficits, in the hopes that the dollars poured into health care and education will create a new baseline for government’s obligations, which in turn will create the political space for tax increases on the middle class. Like the starve-the-beast approach, the Obama strategy puts off the hard part till tomorrow: Give them tax cuts today, conservatives said, and they’ll swallow spending cuts tomorrow; give them universal health care, universal pre-K, subsidies for green industry and all the rest of it today, liberals seem to be thinking, and they’ll be willing to pay for it tomorrow.
We’ve seen this before of course.
The New Deal. The Great Society.
Each time the size and scope of government has been expanded, it’s been permanent. It doesn’t matter if it doesn’t make sense anymore. It doesn’t even matter if we can’t afford to pay for it.
Merely by existing, government creates a constituency for it’s own survival; and, when it expands into new areas, it creates new constituencies who can be rallied to fight for it’s survival.
I’ve heard more than one person say that if Obama succeeds in getting universal health care through, then it’s game over as far as the debate over big vs. small government is concerned and I think they’re right. Outside of the collapse that will inevitably occur when the last Ponzi scheme we erect to save Leviathan finally comes up bankrupt, once we have the government exercising near-complete control over the health care system, we can forget about ever returning to an America that bears any resemblance to the document crafted in Philadelphia 214 years ago.
H/T: Stephen Green and James Joyner
As for big government vs. small government, you miss the point on health care. The American system of health care now massively fails. We have the highest rate of preventable death when compared to ALL of the European nations and Canada, the highest child mortality rate, the worst pre-natal care, and the most number of errors and misapplied treatments.
We have the highest number of uninsured as a percent of the population, and health care costs are the single biggest cause of bankruptcy in the United States. When you actually calculate what we spend on health care AND social programs, public and private monies combined, we spend several percent of GDP HIGHER than the European countries and Canada, without guaranteeing a minumum quality of care. So, we spend much more for much less.
For 38 years, we have tried private insurance, and the quality of care had been going down and the uninsured going up. Isn’t it time to look at the REAL results, and try something different?
Yes, because government was formed for the rich, not the common good and general welfare.
Oh, wait. . .
While your hypothesis is interesting and potentially credible, I find your lack of facts regarding the privatization of health care by Richard Nixon to be grossly negligent. Nixon allowed private companies (HMO’s) to inject themselves between doctors and patients, critically damaging a system that worked well on it’s own. The only reason Nixon did it was typical Republican greed; otherwise, he could have cared less about health care.
Haven’t we all stood in line at a government agency wondering if we will ever get to the front?
Have any of you called the IRS (or any government office for that matter) and tried to get an accurate answer?
Didn’t we all see how FEMA handled the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina?
Haven’t we all read about our intelligence community’s incompetence leading up to 9/11?
Do I need to go on?
Why would we expect our healthcare to any different under a government-run system?
It is especially tragic after how much the Government shrunk under G W Bush…….oh wait, that is right, the last Republican administration grew the size, scope and intrusive of the Federal Government beyond even the wettest dreams of 20th century democrats. Now that Republicans have destroyed any credibility they once had as stewards of the public trust and the public purse, is it surprising that democrats are now lining up for their share?
Soon we may all be govt bureaucrats. There may be no other way to survive.
The opposition isn’t massively unpopular; 63 million people voted for McCain/Palin. However, He is a liberal and an opportunist and therefore has complete support from the media and most of his party.
Obama is likely just trying what any good negotiator would try: ask for the world and see what response you get.
If he fails it will be because he runs the economy or military into dire straights. Failure will mean one term only.
If he succeeds it will be because Republican strategy continues to be undermined by people who don’t really believe in liberty, unity (e pluribus unum), and God (in God we Trust): RHINOs, most libertarians, and other Republicans who really do buy into the Humanist Manifesto but haven’t worked it out to it’s final conclusions like liberal Democrats have. OR he won’t break anything too bad in term one that can’t be covered up by something else like the economy getting at least a little better than it is now.