Andy Obermann
Kerry's economic haze
By Andy Obermann
Last Wednesday, Sen. John Kerry wrote a piece that appeared in the Wall Street Journal, outlining his economic policy under his would-be presidency.
Throughout the article, he references the 1990s and the pro-growth era of the Clinton Administration, promising "a return to successes" of that period. He moves from topic to topic, attempting, in his own way, to be as specific as possible, but leaving more of an aloof impression than anything else, he offers few details and a lot of campaign rhetoric.
One of the major buzzwords in American politics today is jobs. How many jobs have been created — how many lost? Kerry knows this and has ceaselessly attempted to capitalize on it.
In the Journal piece, Kerry makes the case that under the Bush Administration; the job market is the worst since the great depression. He lambastes the president claiming, "[the job market]...is weaker now than the worst year under the Clinton Administration."
There's one thing Kerry seems to be ignoring — unemployment.
You see, during the Clinton Regime unemployment averaged out to about 5.6%. Sometimes it was a bit higher, sometimes a bit lower, but on average, 5.6%. At the time, Democrats across the nation were praising Clinton as the bringer of good fortune for the American economy and their answer to the economic failures of the last Democrat to hold office, Jimmy Carter.
Last month, the Labor Department released the current unemployment rate under the Bush Administration. Listening to John Kerry, one would think it was above 6. In reality, however, Bush's unemployment rate is 5.4% — a full .2% lower than that of the Clinton years. But Kerry consistently implies unemployment is so bad that soon bread lines will be opening for the droves of jobless American workers.
Speaking of American workers, Kerry tried yet again to have it both ways when he opined on free trade.
When discussing the global economy, he stated, "I voted for NAFTA and the WTO." Yet in the very next sentence, Kerry claims he "...[has] always believed we need a level playing field for American workers."
Well, which is it? Either you support free trade or you support protectionist policies. Both have reasonable arguments behind them and each makes logical sense, but you can't be for them both — they don't go hand in hand. By supporting free trade organizations such as NAFTA, American workers are squeezed by cheap labor in third world countries. If you support protectionist policies, those "leveling the playing field" for American workers, you demand all nations to institute wage requirements and labor conditions. But, you can't have it both ways, so which is it, senator?
It doesn't stop there; Kerry tries to carve a niche for himself in between every issue discussed. He admits that the "private sector has always been America's engine" for job creation, yet he falls back to class warfare promising to raise taxes on "those families making $200,000 or more a year," — the very people creating the jobs.
He slides in between opposing trade deficits and seeing the need for them. He erroneously blames tax cuts for our current budget deficit, while promoting the very spending that actually caused them, then claims to be a fiscal conservative when supporting balanced budget initiatives in the 80's.
The most striking fact is that John Kerry seems to be living in a pre-9/11 haze. He acts as if that tragic event never happened — and its impact on our economy was a minor ding.
It is almost as if he is wishing for the foregone days when Islamic terrorism did not threaten our economy. He claims this is an "excuse" for our previous economic hardships, but the true ramifications of that day are just now being overcome.
In fact, it took three long years for the economy to see improvement and with continual terror warnings and threats; it is only natural that investors and employers are a bit hesitant to put their money into an uncertain market.
Kerry's promise of returning to the "successes of the 1990s" is not only idealistic, it is absurd.
With our entirely different set of circumstances, including the looming terror threat, it is impossible to turn back the clock to the 9/10 economy.
Our economy under the Bush Administration is strong and growing. Unemployment is down, manufacturing is up, and jobs are being created. The remedies suggested by Kerry will cripple our recovery.
© Andy Obermann
Last Wednesday, Sen. John Kerry wrote a piece that appeared in the Wall Street Journal, outlining his economic policy under his would-be presidency.
Throughout the article, he references the 1990s and the pro-growth era of the Clinton Administration, promising "a return to successes" of that period. He moves from topic to topic, attempting, in his own way, to be as specific as possible, but leaving more of an aloof impression than anything else, he offers few details and a lot of campaign rhetoric.
One of the major buzzwords in American politics today is jobs. How many jobs have been created — how many lost? Kerry knows this and has ceaselessly attempted to capitalize on it.
In the Journal piece, Kerry makes the case that under the Bush Administration; the job market is the worst since the great depression. He lambastes the president claiming, "[the job market]...is weaker now than the worst year under the Clinton Administration."
There's one thing Kerry seems to be ignoring — unemployment.
You see, during the Clinton Regime unemployment averaged out to about 5.6%. Sometimes it was a bit higher, sometimes a bit lower, but on average, 5.6%. At the time, Democrats across the nation were praising Clinton as the bringer of good fortune for the American economy and their answer to the economic failures of the last Democrat to hold office, Jimmy Carter.
Last month, the Labor Department released the current unemployment rate under the Bush Administration. Listening to John Kerry, one would think it was above 6. In reality, however, Bush's unemployment rate is 5.4% — a full .2% lower than that of the Clinton years. But Kerry consistently implies unemployment is so bad that soon bread lines will be opening for the droves of jobless American workers.
Speaking of American workers, Kerry tried yet again to have it both ways when he opined on free trade.
When discussing the global economy, he stated, "I voted for NAFTA and the WTO." Yet in the very next sentence, Kerry claims he "...[has] always believed we need a level playing field for American workers."
Well, which is it? Either you support free trade or you support protectionist policies. Both have reasonable arguments behind them and each makes logical sense, but you can't be for them both — they don't go hand in hand. By supporting free trade organizations such as NAFTA, American workers are squeezed by cheap labor in third world countries. If you support protectionist policies, those "leveling the playing field" for American workers, you demand all nations to institute wage requirements and labor conditions. But, you can't have it both ways, so which is it, senator?
It doesn't stop there; Kerry tries to carve a niche for himself in between every issue discussed. He admits that the "private sector has always been America's engine" for job creation, yet he falls back to class warfare promising to raise taxes on "those families making $200,000 or more a year," — the very people creating the jobs.
He slides in between opposing trade deficits and seeing the need for them. He erroneously blames tax cuts for our current budget deficit, while promoting the very spending that actually caused them, then claims to be a fiscal conservative when supporting balanced budget initiatives in the 80's.
The most striking fact is that John Kerry seems to be living in a pre-9/11 haze. He acts as if that tragic event never happened — and its impact on our economy was a minor ding.
It is almost as if he is wishing for the foregone days when Islamic terrorism did not threaten our economy. He claims this is an "excuse" for our previous economic hardships, but the true ramifications of that day are just now being overcome.
In fact, it took three long years for the economy to see improvement and with continual terror warnings and threats; it is only natural that investors and employers are a bit hesitant to put their money into an uncertain market.
Kerry's promise of returning to the "successes of the 1990s" is not only idealistic, it is absurd.
With our entirely different set of circumstances, including the looming terror threat, it is impossible to turn back the clock to the 9/10 economy.
Our economy under the Bush Administration is strong and growing. Unemployment is down, manufacturing is up, and jobs are being created. The remedies suggested by Kerry will cripple our recovery.
© Andy Obermann
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
