Cogito Ergo Non Serviam
Progressives Voting No on Debt Deal are Not Progressive
The House of Representatives will vote tonight on the deal negotiated by the president and the speaker. It is almost certain to pass, and on the extremes, both parties have rebels. No one expects much from the far right on this. They are not interested in governing but in burning it all down. On the left, however, there are some who are going to grandstand and posture over minor issues. These legislators are the worst kind of fraus. There is absolutely no progressive reason to vote against raising the debt ceiling under these circumstances. Voting not to raise the ceiling is a vote to wreck the economy and hurt the very people progressives say they want to protect.
This morning on MSNBC, Joe Scarborough interviewed Congressman Ro Khanna (D-CA), who has proudly unfurled his progressive banner while at the same time stating he would vote against the deal. He is going to do so knowing full well that his opposition cannot derail the deal. He is going to need 217 partners in crime to prevent the deal passing the House. He knows damned well that he does not have the votes to stop it. He does not really want to stop it. What he wants is for others to take the difficult vote while he gets to signal his ideological purity. The man does not want to do his own dirty work.
Nor is he the only progressive who takes this view. Axios reported, "Progressive Caucus Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) told reporters on a Tuesday press call that the GOP \'did not win any major concessions on spending,\' but that the bill still has provisions progressives are \'seriously concerned about\'." She has said she will vote against the bill.
The progressives voting no complain that some people will have to face work requirements for some kinds of assistance. This journal agrees that these arbitrary and inflexible requirements are not a good idea. People who need help simply need help, not more barriers to that help. But the analysts have found that more, not fewer, people will be eligible under these new requirements because there are several exceptions. It is true some individuals will be harmed by this, and others will be helped. The progressive No crowd are voting, they say, to protest the treatment of those losing out.
They are also voting to stop the American government from paying bills already incurred. There is no way to separate the vote to protest from the vote to crash the global economy. It is the same vote. They can say that they are voting to protest, but the vote will say they do not want to raise the debt ceiling in time to avoid a default.
The effects of a default would be disastrous, and most of the pain will fall on those who need the most help. If the economy locks up and insterest rates soar as most economists predict should the US Treasury miss payments, the well-heeled will suffer some, but they have the resources to get through the awfulness. Those whom the progressives want to look after would suffer a great deal more. For instance, a few million jobs will be lost. They will not be CEOs out pounding the pavement. Those with few resources will find themselves on the short end of the economic stick.
Virtue signalling is a horrible way to govern. The progressives need to vote yes. Those who do not will be voting with the hard right. The company one keeps . . . .
© Copyright 2023 by The Kensington Review, Jeff Myhre, PhD, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent. Produced using Ubuntu Linux.
|
|
|
