E.J. Dionne: An Absurd Debate (big government/small government)

[marmar]

From Truthdig:


An Absurd Debate


Posted on Jul 31, 2007
By E.J. Dionne

HARBERT, Mich.—One of the most predictable arguments is also one of the most useless: that politics comes down to a choice between being for “big government” or “small government.” Those catchphrases explain remarkably little about what politicians do, or what voters want.

Could there be any more of a big-government endeavor than the invasion and reordering of Iraq, pursued by a president from the party of small government? Do the domestic spying programs have anything to do with a small-government agenda?

The big-government framework was almost entirely irrelevant to last week’s debate in the House over the farm program. Many farm-state conservatives are resolutely opposed to “welfare” programs but passionately favor big-government subsidies to farmers, even rich ones.

In the meantime, the coalition against excessive government entanglement in the farm economy crisscrossed all ideological boundaries, running from Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., to Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., to Rep. Ron Kind, D-Wis.

Kind’s amendment to reform the farm program attracted an admirable band of supporters, including some of the most liberal and most conservative members of the House. Yet it was overwhelmingly voted down because a slew of farm-state conservatives uncharacteristically joined the Democratic leadership in opposing it.

Rep. Robert Goodlatte, R-Va., said Kind’s proposal “rips out the safety net for American farmers and ranchers.” At last: a safety net many conservatives love. Democratic leaders, for their part, opposed Kind because they wanted an electoral safety net for their vulnerable members from farming districts.

The same inconsistencies apply even to that dreaded concept, “socialized medicine.” Last week, the American auto companies opened what will be difficult negotiations with the United Auto Workers union. The toughest issue will be health care. General Motors paid $4.8 billion for health care last year, including $3 billion for retirees. Is it any wonder that the good capitalists at GM and the other car companies would love the government to pick up some of these costs?

“There’s been an enormous paradigm shift in the business community,” says Gov. Jennifer Granholm, a Democrat who has led Michigan during the crisis in the auto industry. Health care, she said, has “gone from being a moral issue to being an economic issue,” meaning that business leaders who once had objections in principle to government-led health care reform now have a powerful interest in making it happen. ......(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20070731_an_absurd_debate/