How To Starve A Healthy Beast

Much has been made of the fact that the budget released today by the White House raises medical costs for veterans, guts the food stamp program, makes it more difficult for poor kids to go to college, cuts environmental spending, provides less for first responders, slashes funding for health services, etc….but I haven’t seen anyone take a step back and see how this fits into the masterplan.

Keep in mind that one of the goals of the Bush administration has been to, in the words of Grover Nordquist, “starve the beast”. As free market zealots, the more they can get the government to tighten its belt (and send that work to their buddies in the private sector), the closer they get to their utopian vision of capitalism completely free of government influence. If you think back to when Bush was elected though, there’s one little problem : the budget was balanced and we had a surplus. Needless to say, it’s hard to convince the public that we need to close the homeless shelters and let the environment fend for itself when we’ve got extra money.

What’s the best way for the Bushies to shrink the government? Use same sales pitch they’ve used for everything from Iraq to Social Security : scare the hell out of everyone with talk of a crisis. Of course the difference between the budget deficit and Social Security situations is clear. Unlike the privatization scheme, the budget deficit really is an impending crisis. One for which Bush is personally responsible. Four years ago, the budget was balanced and we were paying down the deficit, but the orgy of tax cuts, bloated spending, and the like have given an Orwellian flavor to Bush’s “responsibility era”.

Just like it’s hard to convince a healthy person to go on a diet, the Bushies were fully aware that simple math and common sense would make Americans averse to shrinking social services. So what do they do? They put the government on a four year spending binge. Tax cuts for the rich, handouts to religious groups, giveaways to the pharmaceutical industry, etc… Is it any wonder why Bush never vetoed any bills? The more they waste money, the quicker they can move onto their real goal.

Two years ago, the message was “deficits don’t matter”, but today it’s “Let’s worry about the deficit” (Yes, he really said that). Looking back at the last four years, it looks like everything is going according to plan. Now that the government has been turned into the bloated, irresponsible bureaucracy that matches their rhetoric, they’ve moved operation “starve the beast” into phase two.


posted by greg on February 7, 2005 @ 4:52 pm

4 comments

  1. I would like to see someone point out that

    “their utopian vision of capital1sm completely free of government influence”

    already exists. Is called the third world. Compare that to quasi-social1st states like Norway. Yup, the Republicans are leading us in the right direction, no doubt about that.

    BTW–it won’t let me post the word capital*sm because it contains the word cial*s. Kind of appropriate. Republican cial*s.

    Comment by tJonBergman — February 8, 2005 @ 5:59 am

  2. Hey, that’s what I’ve been saying! Of course, I was just paraphrasing what David Stockman said in the 80s…

    I frequently wonder if the pathological hatred of Bill Clinton had something to do with his setting back their timetable. They spend twelve years on Phase One — creating this lovely deficit — and along comes Clinton who, in his very first budget, whittles down the deficit beyond what any of the “experts” said could be done. Damn him!

    Here’s what I’d like to know: Wouldn’t a long-range plan to destabilize and weaken the strength of this nation (you can hardly assert that functional bankruptcy is a measure of strength) constitute, um, TREASON???

    Or is that just me….

    Comment by Roddy McCorley — February 8, 2005 @ 10:03 am

  3. I frequently wonder if the pathological hatred of Bill Clinton had something to do with his setting back their timetable

    Roddy, that’s a profound thought, one that never occurred to me before. Thanx

    Comment by darms — February 8, 2005 @ 1:57 pm

  4. Man, if the Democrats had any sense, they’d stick riders on any budget proposals to FIRST change taxes back to the Clinton-era mix BEFORE cutting any social spending.

    It’s a no brainer – “Let’s get rid of handouts to the rich before we get rid of spending on the poor”.

    And if the wingnuts wanna scream “class warfare!”. let ‘em. Time there was a public debate in America about growing inequality, anyhow.

    Comment by Phoenician in a time of Romans — February 8, 2005 @ 8:46 pm

Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.