Published: November 03, 2009 12:39 pm      

Initial stimulus plan had so much potential

The media have been engaging in some supremely schizophrenic behavior. As the economy’s emergence from recession makes headlines and the White House releases figures about the success of its January stimulus, this fact can’t be lost on many.

Remember back with me to the dawn of Barack Obama’s presidency. The country was still only a few months removed from the precipice of economic collapse, those frantic days in September when a run on the banks seemed an all-too-real possibility.

The troubles of Wall Street had seeped onto Main Street, as the unemployment rate hit 7.6 percent and continued a steady ascent to its September mark of 9.8 percent.

All the while you could hear whimpers in the winter air emanating from Republican congressmen and women and governors and the voices to which they’d ceded control of their party – then freshly elected Republican Party chairman Michael Steele and pseudo-chairman Rush Limbaugh. The president’s plan to stimulate the economy and salve our financial malaise was too big, too costly and didn’t cut taxes enough.

Socialism, they collectively huffed.

And guess who listened, even amplified those cries?

“In your mind, is that starting the role of socialism?” Fox News anchorwoman Gretchen Carlson quizzed Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine on the air in early February.

Not to be outdone, Carlson’s colleague, Sean Hannity, ever the arbiter of truth, called the bill “the European Socialist Act of 2009.”

The national debt, which reporters and pundits largely ignored as President Bush spent his way through two wars and exasperated the gulf between America’s rich and poor with tax cuts for the wealthy, suddenly gained front-page status.

Never mind the mounting job losses, the unabated foreclosure rate, the slew of states that faced record budget deficits and, hence, spending cuts at the worst possible time. This bill would stack future generations with mountains of debt.

The press corps became a bunch of deficit hawks, scouring each line item of the $787 billion bill, which, thanks to Republican pressure and the president’s weak knees, was heavy on tax cuts and light on other stimuli.

Any dollar that could somehow be tracked to a local zoo, or heaven forbid, was only six degrees of separation from ACORN, the liberal community organizing group maligned during the 2008 campaign for sketchy voter registration activity, was major news.

Virtually no one hinted that the president’s efforts were too small, as a number of leading economists were suggesting. In fact, only 15 of the 59 network news broadcasts with stimulus stories from Jan. 15 to Feb. 25 mentioned warnings that the bill wasn’t big enough, the media watchdog Media Matters for America reported in March.

Fast forward to today.

The emerging narrative is that the initial bout of stimulus was, get this, too small, that spending has been too slow.

Where were these stories 11 months ago?

Where was the skepticism as the president back-pedaled from his pledges for a robust bill that would revamp America’s crumbling infrastructure, put people to work, and strengthened the safety net in favor of a plan with $275 billion in tax cuts – one-third of the bill’s total cost? Even economist Mark Zandi, who advised John McCain during the 2008 election, believed such cuts were among the least stimulative measures on the table, as he said in testimony before the House Committee on Small Business in July 2008.

But ever in fear of giving red meat to those alleging liberal bias, the press bought hook, line and sinker into Republican talking points, and we’re all feeling the effects of their cowardice.

A mere $116 billion of the stimulus funds has been spent, while $63 billion in taxes has been slashed, according to ProPublica, the nonprofit investigative journalism outlet. That accounts for about 23 percent of the bill’s total price tag.

Statistics on jobs saved or created are murky, but it looks as if the stimulus has at least mitigated some of the damage. The bump in federal aid to the states kept them from dipping further into disarray. And “reinvestment” projects are popping up across the country, though probably too late to have stopped the recession.

That said, it’s hard to say the bill’s been a total flop. But it’s also hard to say what could’ve been had the drumbeat against a larger, more progressive bill not been so loud.

As the economy languishes in a jobless recovery and the housing market remains shaky, another stimulus is probably needed before spring. Let’s hope this time we can ignore those midwinter whimpers.



Ryan Wilk of Bedford is a 2009 Penn State graduate with a journalism degree and an occasional sports stringer for The Tribune-Democrat.