David Broder occasionally get it right, sort of. This column of his sounds like he is very reasoned until you get to the last three paragraphs and see it is a recommendation for the Republicans and Obama to comprimise. I certainly don’t think that can happen and pray that it doesn’t.
The title sounds reasonable enough What America might learn from the British austerity model.
The first two paragraphs seem reasonable:
The most important political news last week came from across the Atlantic, where the coalition government of British Prime Minister David Cameron ordered an austerity budget that radically reduces government spending on the welfare state. Both the policy and the political circumstances that brought it about have profound implications for the United States.
This country has wandered far — not quite as far as Britain has — toward the pending fiasco that threatens leftist regimes worldwide, and the reaction here in the Nov. 2 midterm elections is likely to be as painful for President Obama and the Democrats as the May 6 election was for Labor’s Gordon Brown.
This sounds reasonable:
George Osborne, Cameron’s chancellor of the exchequer, did not mince words. He told Parliament, “Today is the day when Britain steps back from the brink, when we confront the bills from a decade of debt.” Britain’s budget deficit, now 11.4 percent of the size of its overall economy, is not that much larger than the United States’ — 8.9 percent — but the debate has been similar in both countries.
The middle explains what is happening in Great Britain and somewhat reasonable (read it here)
UH OH! Here’s where reasonable ends:
The American political system virtually precludes the possibility of a coalition government. But the midterm elections provide the opportunity for a similar breakthrough. If Republicans emerge next month with sufficient leverage in the House and Senate to approach Obama with a proposition, they could insist that he “do a Cameron” when it comes to federal spending: a radical rollback now in the welfare state in return for a two-year truce on such policy questions as repeal of the health-care law. (This is a part I could go for)
The vehicle could well be Obama’s strong endorsement of the Dec. 1 report from his fiscal responsibility commission, which is expected to emphasize spending discipline over raising revenue. This would offer major gains to both parties, and set the stage for another experiment in the British model. (This is where you just know David Broder expects us to compromise)
Can’t we just all get along? NO!!! Am I being too hard on Broder? Let me know what you think.