Gaming out the White House’s jobs agenda

[ProSense]

Gaming out the White House’s jobs agenda

By Steve Benen

We know President Obama will present a new economic plan in a few weeks, and while we don’t know what’s in it, the early hints http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_08/the_real_grand_bargain031618.php">offer some encouragement.

But as we consider what’s likely to unfold in the coming months, the optimism about the still-unannounced plan is quickly tempered. Thanks to the midterm elections, public antagonism towards “stimulus” initiatives, and the direction of the larger political winds, it’s seems fair to say the new agenda probably won’t be immediately and warmly received.

Jonathan Bernstein considers whether the president’s upcoming speech will matter at all.

The question on the policy end is whether Congress will adopt the president’s suggestions (not likely, depending on the specifics) and if they were adopted, what difference they would make.

Another key question is this: Is Obama’s speech likely to have a significant impact on public opinion? Political science tells us that presidential speeches don’t have much of an impact. Does that make it a bad idea? No, not really.

Presidential speeches can make modest contributions to agenda-setting, so if there’s a chance that a big speech can change the direction of inside-the-Beltway conversations, then it’s worth a try.

Of course it is.

<...>

But the policy efficacy won’t matter if Congress kills the bill. So why unveil a jobs agenda Republicans will reflexively reject? Because now is probably a good time to overcome what Paul Krugman called “learned helplessness.”

Krugman argued in May, “As I see it, policy makers are sinking into a condition of learned helplessness on the jobs issue: the more they fail to do anything about the problem, the more they convince themselves that there’s nothing they could do. And those of us who know better should be doing all we can to break that vicious circle.”

Obama, if the reports are accurate, appears ready to help break that vicious circle, even if Republicans won’t accept it.

more

[gateley]

1. I've heard positing on more stimulus, and as the article states,

the public is antagonistic. (We didn't do a good enough job of showing HOW it helped, and the Republicans, as usual, did an excellent job of showing how it DIDN'T.)

I don't think people care what he says, they care if they get a job. Whatever it takes to accomplish that is what they want.

[ProSense]

2. Benen

made a really good suggestion on the Rachel Maddow show the other day:

President Obama: Say yes to Republican requests for stimulus spending

It reminds me of the pre-election call outs of the GOP for requesting stimulus fund and attending ribbon-cutting ceremonies: Obama calls out GOP hypocrisy for going to ‘ribbon cuttings for the same projects that you voted against.’

Benen's idea could work, but it still requires Congress' cooperation.

[gateley]

3. Thanks for the links. Signed. Does he think it would get

Congress's cooperation or would they find a way to weasel out of that, too?

When Obama "called out" the Republicans on this, it was glossed over (as usual!). He needs to show a clip of one of them saying "No stimulus money!" then cut to a clip of happily cutting the ribbon on the new project. And have the clips ready for each and every one of them. Stuff like that. He says too much sometimes and the message gets lost in the words, IMO.