Representative Paul Ryan squaring off against President Obama dredges up a perennial debate for high school brainiacs: can smart be sexy? Is joining the debate team cooler than cheerleading? Is physics cooler than queer musicology?
The president is in campaign mode, hoping to convince Americans that he can create jobs. He walks a fine line, acknowledging our long-term budget problems while simultaneously proffering spending programs aimed at putting people to work. He terms these initiatives “investments” and they are appealing – sexy, even, like a Pontiac GTO. Who, after all, doesn’t think our infrastructure needs massive repair, or that our schools are failing to provide an acceptable education? It’s an easy sell. Americans are an optimistic and positive people. As individuals and as a nation, we don’t want to be told we can’t afford things; if we need new ports and new schools, by gosh we should have them. No one is going to be elected president by making us feel bad about ourselves. No one is excited by a Chevy Volt.
At the same time, Americans are wising up. They know our finances are a mess. They know our entitlement programs must be reformed and that spending must be reduced if we want our children to prosper. They are alarmed that China owns trillions of dollars of our debt, and that we are losing ground to that emerging nation in so many ways. And…they don’t like it.
is not by spending more, but by spending more wisely.
The task for Paul Ryan and for all Republicans going forward is to convince Americans that smart is sexy, too. They need to argue that the best way to prop up our competitiveness and guarantee our long-term success is not by spending more, but by spending more wisely. This should not be heavy lifting. The much-publicized absurdities financed by the Recovery Act – aka the Stimulus – broadcast how large-scale government programs are not likely to be managed intelligently. Funding the study of exotic ants overseas or creating joke-telling machines provided talk show hosts with super one-liners, but didn’t do much for government credibility.
As the Stimulus winds down, Republicans should maintain a continuing narrative of taxpayer money being squandered. Such anecdotes are easy to find, and put meat on the fiscal prudence bones. For instance, Citizens against Government Waste provides a steady stream of nonsensical budget items, like the Essential Air Service which underwrites remote air travel in places like Johnstown, Pennsylvania. Except that Johnstown isn’t remote at all- it’s a mere two hours from Pittsburgh. Taxpayers are ponying up tens of million of dollars each year to support this airport, the source of a mere 18 flights per week. Or, they could talk about the duplicative and unnecessary National Drug Intelligence Service that has cost hundreds of millions of dollars – which the Justice Department has asked Congress to shut down. Such tales bring home the opportunity to redeploy some of our spending – and make it smarter.
Even better, I would challenge Americans across the country to report their own observations of government waste. Just like the “See Something Say Something” campaign, a call to root out excess could ignite a firestorm. Republicans could set up an office in the House of Representative charged with reviewing and eliminating wasteful spending. If it didn’t pay for itself in 18 months, they could abolish it. Put the voters in charge.
Republicans need to make this case: we have the greatest nation in the world and we want to keep it that way. We are in the early stages of a recovery – with jobless claims falling, retail spending and consumer confidence on the uptick – which will pick up speed if we don’t muck it up. Confirming that positive assessment, a new Bloomberg poll of global financial gurus ranks the U.S. as the most attractive place in the world to invest today-- ahead of China. All is not lost.
Republicans must convince Americans that we have momentum, and that we don’t need large new government programs. They cannot get bogged down in discussions of prospective inflation rates, currency values and credit ratings – flow charts are definitely not sexy. They don’t need to reference the destruction of future growth recently inflicted on Greece or Spain because of those countries’ budget incontinence. Instead, they need to offer solutions to the country’s problems, like our failing education system, that rely on spending smarter, not spending more.
It’s an easy case to make. In education, we spend more per pupil than almost any country on earth -- $553 billion or 4.2% of GDP, in 2006-7, the latest data available. Moreover, our commitment to education has increased mightily. In 1970, we spent $5,593 per pupil on K-12 education; by 2006 that figure had jumped to $12,463. Despite this surge in spending, our student performance has not improved; our students rank 30th in math proficiency compared to other nations, 23rd in the sciences and 17th in reading. Clearly, we are not getting our money’s worth.
Similarly, Republicans need to endorse renewed investment in infrastructure. They can do that by supporting the governors across the country who are pushing for public-private partnerships, both to leverage their states’ constrained budgets and to bring on board greater expertise and efficiency from the private sector. Though unions have resisted such joint ventures that may disadvantage organized workers, this approach is essential to building new airports, tunnels and other developments that could enhance our industrial competitiveness. It accomplishes just what we all want—with less money. Smart, right?
Paul Begala, former advisor to Bill Clinton, recently offered the president this advice: “Obama needs to own the word “jobs.” Not “stimulus” or “capital markets” or “infrastructure” or all the $5 Harvard words they use over there.” That’s good messaging, though maybe a little condescending. Here’s my advice to Republicans: let’s own the word “smart.” Better yet, let’s make it sexy.
Related Links:
Budget Experts Grade Obama (CNN)
Q & A on the State of the Union (The New York Times)
Obama Spending Freeze Criticized as ‘Deficit Preservation’ (Fox News)
