March 10, 2009
PRE-EMPTIVE RESPONSE ON EDUCATION.... The more the president's detractors push the White House to scale back its agenda, the more Obama pushes back. Here's the president today on education policy:
"I know there are some who believe we can only handle one challenge at a time. They forget that Lincoln helped lay down the transcontinental railroad, passed the Homestead Act, and created the National Academy of Sciences in the midst of Civil War. Likewise, President Roosevelt didn't have the luxury of choosing between ending a depression and fighting a war. President Kennedy didn't have the luxury of choosing between civil rights and sending us to the moon. And we don't have the luxury of choosing between getting our economy moving now and rebuilding it over the long term.
"America will not remain true to its highest ideals – and America's place as a global economic leader will be put at risk – unless we not only bring down the crushing cost of health care and transform the way we use energy, but also do a far better job than we have been doing of educating our sons and daughters; unless we give them the knowledge and skills they need in this new and changing world.
"For we know that economic progress and educational achievement have always gone hand in hand in America. ... So let there be no doubt: the future belongs to the nation that best educates its citizens."
This probably won't stop folks like David Brooks from complaining -- the columnist today described improving education as "plotting extensive renovations when the house is on fire" -- but it should. Improving the economy and laying the groundwork for long-term growth should be treated as parallel, complementary goals, not opposing forces.
—Steve Benen 5:00 PM
Permalink
| Trackbacks
| Comments (13)
Spot on. I made essentially the same argument yesterday:
http://www.thresheronline.com/archives/832
Of course, you said it far more eloquently.
Posted by: Stephen Smith on March 10, 2009 at 4:52 PM | PERMALINK
Maybe Obama's real plan is to distract the Rebublicuns. Throw so many issues at them that they scatter in confusion.
Posted by: CT on March 10, 2009 at 5:01 PM | PERMALINK
I would go further and argue that these educational goals are part of the solution to the bank problem. We have a choice of writing off debt, which will have a cascading effect, or at best allow us to return to a debt driven economy. Or we can put more people to work and say your sacrifice is to pay your debts so fewer bank debts need to be written off. When the economy improves, you will be asked to pay a reasonable tax rate (hopefully with higher incomes) to pay down the debt created by these writeoffs and stimuli.
In the short term more teachers mean more people paying their debts and buying goods, while more students, especially in college, mean more openings to people who are otherwise unemployed.
Posted by: Danp on March 10, 2009 at 5:05 PM | PERMALINK
The people complaining aren't working all that hard, anyway. How difficult is it to just keep saying "no", or "tax cut"?
Posted by: qwerty on March 10, 2009 at 5:17 PM | PERMALINK
The President would do well to make that case that treating the economy, health care, energy, etc. as disparate entities was one of the failures that landed us in our present condition. It is almost impossible to have a large long-lived business enterprise in this country. Legacy health care costs for retired workers become a crushing burden unless the company is able to continue rapid growth. Unless you improve all of these items the US economy will not prosper.
Moreover Brooks' analogy is a poor one. The house was on fire 18 months to two years ago. That was when a well-timed stimulus package combined with bank reform and restructuring would have allowed us to dodge this thing. It didn't happen. Now the house and much of the surrounding neighborhood has burned down. As long as you are rebuilding it there is no sense in reconstructing the flaws that existed before the fire.
Posted by: rk on March 10, 2009 at 5:18 PM | PERMALINK
"It is hard to remember your purpose was to drain the swamp when you are up to your neck in alligators." I think this is the better analogy. President Obama is fighting the alligators, but he is not ignoring the longer term purpose of draining the swamp. It is only amazing that he has not been distracted by the immediate crises and is tackling what is really the larger, longterm project of draining the swamp (health care; education; energy).
Posted by: Johnny Canuck on March 10, 2009 at 5:21 PM | PERMALINK
I dunno, maybe Brooks has a point. Is our children learning?
Posted by: pj in jesusland on March 10, 2009 at 5:46 PM | PERMALINK
Remember when GWB droned on about spending his "political capital" after the '04 election? President Obama understands the long and short view, will decisively lay out his agenda for the next year. Mr. President, don't let them catch their breath.
Posted by: Appletree on March 10, 2009 at 6:34 PM | PERMALINK
He could also have pointed out that the land-grant college system that so many Midwestern states depend on was founded under Lincoln in the midst of the war. Though that might have been too on-the-nose.
Posted by: Mnemosyne on March 10, 2009 at 7:32 PM | PERMALINK
the columnist today described improving _________ as "plotting extensive renovations when the house is on fire"
Time to place your bets. How many times will Brooks run the above sentence over the next four years?
My money is on 25.
Also, do you think the GOP will ever notice that Obama has taken complete procession of the Lincoln meme? I think they have and he does it to piss them off.
Posted by: The Answer WAS Orange on March 10, 2009 at 8:56 PM | PERMALINK
The President should make this argument. I've been in office a little over 45 days. I've passed a stimulas bill, a budget, and a credible housing plan. The house may be burning, but a firefighter does try to assess the level of risk to himself and others (sort of like completing a banking stress test) before he starts fighting the fire.
Posted by: aline on March 11, 2009 at 8:11 AM | PERMALINK
He could also have pointed out that the land-grant college system that so many Midwestern states depend on was founded under Lincoln in the midst of the war. Though that might have been too on-the-nose.
Posted by: Mnemosyne
Don't forget the Homestead Act, the National Bank Act, and the Pacific Railways Act.
Yes, good residents can walk and chew gum at the same time.
Posted by: 2Manchu on March 11, 2009 at 9:36 AM | PERMALINK
Whoops, should be "good Presidents".
But I'm sure good residents are good at walking and chewing gum at the same time.
Or at least watch tv and eat preztels at the same time.
Posted by: 2Manchu on March 11, 2009 at 9:38 AM | PERMALINK