A
column in the Washington Post puts the problems with Romney squarely on where his party has gone:
Why won’t Romney, an intelligent man, fluent in economics, explain
his economic policy? Because any sensible answer would cause a firestorm
in his party.
It is obvious that, with a deficit at 8 percent of
gross domestic product, any solution to our budgetary problems has to
involve both spending cuts and tax increases. Ronald Reagan agreed to
tax increases when the deficit hit 4 percent of GDP; George H.W. Bush
did so when the deficit was 3 percent of GDP. But today’s Republican
Party is organized around the proposition that, no matter the
circumstances, there must never be a tax increase of any kind. The
Simpson-Bowles proposal calls for $1 of tax increases for every $3 of
spending cuts. But every Republican presidential candidate — including
Romney — pledged during the primaries that he or she would not accept
$10 of spending cuts if that meant a dollar of tax increases.
So
Romney could present a serious economic plan with numbers that make
sense — and then face a revolt within his own party. His solution: to be
utterly vague about how he would deal with the deficit.
And it ends:
The Republican Party has imposed a new kind of political correctness on
its leaders. They cannot speak certain words (taxes) or speculate about
certain ideas (immigration amnesty) because these are forbidden. Romney
has tried to run a campaign while not running afoul of his party’s
strictures. As a result, he has twisted himself into a pretzel, speaking
vacuously, avoiding specifics and refusing to provide any serious plans
for the most important issues of the day.
All sounds about right to me.
No comments:
Post a Comment