If you’ve been here a while, you may recall that I posted an article called “Responsibility for the national debt part deux: control of the purse strings of Congress is the real determinant”, which demonstrated that the truest indicator for the economic health of the country is which party is in control of Congress. It is worth a re-read. Recent events called that post back to mind.
As you may have heard, the Washington Post published an article called “Americans saw wealth plummet 40 percent from 2007 to 2010, Federal Reserve says“. I think the title tells it all.
Now let’s review: who had complete control of Congress from 2008 to 2010? Yes, it was Queen Pelosi and her flying monkeys, the same Pelosi that was on the today’s CBS This Morning show telling us all how Øbama will focus on jobs (yet again) in his second term: “the president was a job creator from day one“. The same “economic giant” Pelosi that told us that welfare and food stamps create jobs.
I bring this up because you can be sure that the Democrats (with the possible exception of Carter) will pull the old “under Bush’s watch” meme out, as has Øbama, to defect attention and responsibility for the poor economy. Or should I say “the worst economy since the Great Depression?” 😉 It might also explain why they are trying so desperately to convince the middle class that Romney is bad for them. To wit:
The recent recession wiped out nearly two decades of Americans’ wealth, according to government data released Monday, with middle-class families bearing the brunt of the decline.
The Federal Reserve said the median net worth of families plunged by 39 percent in just three years, from $126,400 in 2007 to $77,300 in 2010. That puts Americans roughly on par with where they were in 1992.
I think it is pretty obvious (although not from reading this article in the WaPo) that it is Øbama and the congressional Democrats that are bad for the middle class. Clearly, they doth protest to much.
By no means does this let Øbama (or Bush) off the hook, but a president does have a fair degree of influence, particularly when in agreement (or in thrall) with the party in control of Congress, but the true purse strings are in the hands of Congress, which explains why Harry Reid is snuffing out all legislation from the Republican controlled House: he can’t afford to have the Republicans look good, and a (correct) conclusion be drawn that Republicans generally improve the economy, while Democrats drag it down.
Like Reagan, a strong, principled, well spoken president, who understands economics, can improve the economy by influencing a Democrat controlled Congress to go against its base nature. It is even easier when Democrats are in the minority.
Remember in November.