David Brooks castigates the Republicans in the U.S. House who killed the bailout bill:
And let us recognize above all the 228 who voted no — the authors of this revolt of the nihilists. They showed the world how much they detest their own leaders and the collected expertise of the Treasury and Fed. They did the momentarily popular thing, and if the country slides into a deep recession, they will have the time and leisure to watch public opinion shift against them.
Leave aside the issue of whether the bailout is a good idea. What bothers me more is the method that Brooks is saying congressmen should use to determine how to vote. If congressmen should have merely stepped in line with the wishes of administration officials and their party leaders on the bailout bill, then there is no reason that they should not do the same for all laws under consideration by Congress. Brooks is saying that individual congressmen should disregard their personal thoughts and feelings, as well as those of their constituents. (Public opinion seems to be overwhelmingly opposed to a bailout.)
Such a world would be neither a democracy nor a republic; it would be an oligarchy.
Now Available: E-Book download: "Letters from Israel: An American journalist’s adventures in the Holy Land."
Related posts:
It’s encouraging that they are listening to the American public. I read this morning that what swayed Hawaii Congressmans’ vote is the overwhelming public response he received. Brooks’ comments are foolish — just because you belong to a party does not mean you automatically vote for whatever they deem best. Doesn’t it seem strange that the very people who were the architects of the $700 billion bail-out are the very ones who caused the problem to begin with? Peculiar. I subscribe to an independent financial magazine you may enjoy called Monetary Intelligence Magazine. You can request a complimentary copy on their website, http://monetaryintel.com. Like you, they give it to you straight. Sarah & Tim(Quote)
Brooks was just plain wrong on his opinion of the bailout. He was right, however, in noting the lack of leadership from anyone in government. Jeff(Quote)
I think part of the problem of lack of leadership is that many different officials are responsible for overseeing (or not) the economy.
The Federal Reserve and the U.S. Treasury Department are both powerful but essentially independent of each other. The Executive Branch has several other agencies (like the SEC) as well. Congress must play a role too. You have dozens of powerful, private players in the market as well. I can imagine it being difficult for all of them to co-ordinate policy and agree on something.
Essentially, in economic matters, there is no single person that can say, “the buck stops here.” Who could lead in this environment? Sam Scott(Quote)