Bipartisan Folly

By Brian Beutler

Ryan Avent writes:

You know, the bottom line on the stimulus debate is this: a substantial package is necessary, and a substantial package will be imperfect, so we’re going to get an imperfect package. Certainly we will get a package that will not appeal to most conservatives, which is a good thing, because most conservatives are dead wrong on the issue of stimulus. But as Steve Benen notes, these conservatives are winning the public relations battle, and as a result, public support for stimulus is falling.

And, of course, that means Democrats are doubling down on bipartisan overtures. As I’ve noted elsewhere, though, bipartisanship doesn’t help anybody if two parties are approaching the same problem from incompatible vantage points. If Barack Obama really “rejects” the economic philosophies of the right, then he might as well go negotiate with yogurt. That might at least help him think through his own goals for the stimulus package. And if not? Hey! Free yogurt!

What he’s done instead, of course, is granted Republicans tons of leeway to tinker with the specifics of the bill. One of the inconvenient facts about stimulus is that the size really isn’t negotiable. If a $600 billion stimulus really might work, then Democrats could negotiate down the size of the bill without gumming up the content with a bunch of amendments that may well be stimulative, but aren’t necessarily all that wise.

Tonight Congress approved the Isakson amendment which gives $15,000 (or 10 percent of the purchase price, whichever is lower) to every person who buys a home in 2009.Somehow, Isakson has this thing costing just $19 billion. Let’s break the Washington rules and try a little arithmetic. Even with weakness in the housing market, it is still virtually certain that we will sell close to 5 million homes in 2009. The overwhelming majority would qualify for the full credit. So, we get 5 million times $15,000. That sounds a lot like $75 billion.

I suppose if we wanted to, we could build upon the Isakson amendment by suspending environmental regulations and setting aside money for construction workers to build more Kaufman & Broad communities, and coal-fired power plants. That might even technically produce great stimulus. But with Democrats fully in charge the hope was that the money could be spent both in great quantity and in ways that, at the very least, didn’t help entrench the habits that got the country in this mess in the first place. But I guess that’s bipartisanship for you.