Dissing the jobless
Why the Republicans feel comfortable dumping on people out of work
Dissing the jobless
Dick Polman, Inquirer National Political Columnist
Pennsylvania Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Corbett has rightly sparked a controversy with his Friday lament about how jobless people would supposedly prefer to suck for eternity on the public teat rather than seek an honest day's pay. In Corbett's words, "The jobs are there. But if we keep extending unemployment, people are just going to sit there." Hence, his exhortation to the jobless: "Get off your duffs and go to work."
It's probably a waste of cyberspace to detail the obvious - that millions of jobless people would clearly prefer to be working full-time with health benefits, as opposed to sinking into despair at home with no such benefits and a weekly unemployment check capped in Pennsylvania at roughly $560 (with the more typical stipend at $310); that, on average nationwide, there are five active job seekers for every opening (and a far worse ratio for the quality openings); and that these unemployment checks at least give the jobless an opportunity to function as consumers and prime the economic pump (a new study by Moody's Analytics concludes that each dollar spent by the government on jobless pay yields an overall return of $1.61 for the economy).
So let's just look at the politics. Bottom line, Corbett's basic narrative about shiftless slackers is fully in sync with his party's fundamental 'tude. Among other examples, Nevada Senate candidate and tea-party heroine Sharron Angle insists that the long-term jobless are "spoiled," House member Dean Heller has condemned them as "hobos," Senator Orrin Hatch has suggested that jobless people applying for extended benefits should first be required to pass a drug test (jobless = junkies), and Senator John Kyl says that the jobless shouldn't get extended benefits because those benefits make the federal deficit worse (by contrast, this weekend Kyl told Fox News Sunday that tax cuts for the wealthy should be extended, even if they make the federal deficit worse). All of this explains why Senate Republicans (joined by Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson, whose state of Nebraska enjoys a 4.9 percent jobless rate) have blocked the latest push to extend benefits for those on verge of being cut off.
It would appear - at first glance, anyway - that the Republican stance toward the jobless is wildly at odds with the prevailing public mood. In the latest Washington Post-ABC Poll, this question was posed: "Because of the economic downturn, Congress has extended the period in which people can receive unemployment benefits, and is considering doing so again. Supporters say this will help those who can't find work. Opponents say this adds too much to the federal budget deficit. Do you think Congress should or should not approve another extension of unemployment benefits?"
The percentage of those who said that Congress should again extend benefits: 62. The percentage of those opposed: 36.
Even 43 percent of self-identified Republicans (and 57 percent of self-identified moderate/liberal Republicans) are in the Yes camp, apparently buying the basic argument voiced yesterday by a spokesman at the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry: "People are not getting rich off of unemployment. They are not putting money in the bank. It's keeping food on the table and a roof over their heads."
But what's striking is that the aforementioned Republican candidates and lawmakers seem not to fear that their Marie Antoinette let-them-eat-cake rhetoric will backfire at the ballot box. The Post-ABC survey only measures general public sentiment, not the sentiment of those who seem most motivated to vote in November. And those with the greatest enthusiasm - notably, tea-party conservatives who (studies show) are more affluent than the norm - generally buy the GOP's harsh caricature.
To borrow Tom Corbett's terminology, the real question is whether diehard Democrats will get off their duffs and go to the polls en masse in November, or whether they're too demoralized by the current state of play. The GOP's willingness to diss the jobless is proof that they anticipate a decisive conservative turnout.
Lord.Humongous' 1:53 post makes a very good point. This blog is misnamed, unless DP means the debate he fosters but doesn't participate in. It's his call, of course, but I like Bunch jumping in every now and then and Flowers always stops by her blog every Friday afternoon to reply to several themes the posters have generated.— pj katauskas- All the stuff in the stimulus and extension of unemployment benefits is all time in a bottle. It kicks the can down the road a little longer but does nothing to deal with the fundamental problem in the economy. Most of the money went to the states to close budget gaps so cops, teachers, and fireman could stay on the job a little longer. The logic behind thinking $ 1 of unemployment yields 1.61 in economic benefits is about as flawed as you can possibly get. The money first has to be taxed, borrowed , or printed and each process leads to less money in the economy, not more. Seems to me that liberalism is finally out of the laboratory and it isn't working out so well. Obama never seems to waste an opportunity to bash the private sector. It's a case where Obama has bit off the hand that feeds the economy. All very Chavez like, in my view.
- 99 weeks of unemployment? perhaps time for a career change? Yet in the same breath we have an illegal immigration problem because we have jobs that American's won't do. Kinda ironic isn't it?
- I think Businesses are just so skittish about hiring because there is so much uncertainty over what Obama will do. Hopefully he doesn't do any more damage to the economy with this lame duck congress. About the best thing that could happen to Obama is that more balance is restored to our government in November so that Obama can be saved from his horrifc policy goals of cap and trade , card check, drilling ban, and reckless spending. If he's lucky he'll get a Republican congress to put the brakes on all the madness.
Bill.Atkin - You're missing the point. You have to understand that the $1 comes from some money-grubbing rich dude who fondles it but doesn't spend it, thereby taking it out of the economy and making everyone else dirt poor. See, that's where the multiplier comes from! Sadly, many of the posters on this blog are probably nodding their heads in agreement with such a ridiculous notion.- Phil - to add to your post. The same NAACP that calls white Tea Party members racist had to come up with another name for black conservatives. Here's what they think of Kenneth Gladney who was beaten up by SEIU thugs. hint: one of the names they used starts with Uncle and ends with Tom http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-F2khQudUo— Mike Welbourn
- swedesboromike - The best thing that could happen to Obama is that he wakes up one morning and realizes he's deeply unhappy and so packs up his belongings, gathers his entire cabinet (including biden), and they all emigrate in mass to Venezuela. Of course it just so happens that would be the best thing for America too!
- Since January of 2007 Democrats have controlled Congress. Seems like it's been all down hill since then. And when the stimlulus is all spent what are they going to do then?
Comment removed.- Bill.Atkin - So glad to be of help. Hit yourself in the head with a hammer a few times and you to can think like a liberal!
- Lord Humongous- Good one. LMAO!
- @Logathis "Thousands are losing what they relied on because of Republican obstructionism." What a joke you are, logathis. Democrats control the house 255 to 178 and have or control 59 of 100 seats in the Senate. Nobody from the minority in the Senate has even threatened to fillibuster this bill, but somehow in your tiny mind the whole thing is being held up by "Republican obstructionism." You are really pathetic.— Fascinated
- "...a new study by Moody's Analytics concludes that each dollar spent by the government on jobless pay yields an overall return of $1.61 for the economy." The incredible stupidity of the idea that taking money from A and giving it to B somehow results in a net gain to the economy is beyond belief.— Fascinated
- "You have to understand that the $1 comes from some money-grubbing rich dude who fondles it but doesn't spend it, thereby taking it out of the economy and making everyone else dirt poor." Assuming that is true for the sake of argument, unless you are going to try to convince me that the rich dude keeps the money in a mattress, that is still $1 taken out of the banking system and therefore not available to lend to business for investment that might create jobs.— Fascinated
- Fascinated - Read the whole post from which you quote. I was laughing at such logic, not endorsing it.
Cited by the Columbia Journalism Review as one of the nation's top political reporters, and lauded by the ABC News political website as "one of the finest political journalists of his generation," Dick Polman is a national political columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer. He is on the full-time faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, as "writer in residence." Dick has been a frequent guest on C-Span, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and the BBC. He covered the 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 presidential campaigns.
ARCHIVES
All commentaries posted before April 18, 2008, can be accessed at www.dickpolman.blogspot.com.
- American Spectator
- David Limbaugh
- Free Republic
- Glenn Reynolds
- Hugh Hewitt
- Human Events
- John Hawkins
- Matt Lewis
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Opinion Journal
- Power Line
- Red State
- The Brody File
- The Daily Caller
- Town Hall
- Weekly Standard
- Center for American Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- Daily Kos
- David Corn
- Huffington Post
- Media Matters
- Mojoblog (Mother Jones)
- Open Left
- Political Animal
- Salon's War Room
- Talking Points Memo
- Tapped
- The Democratic Strategist
- The Grey Matter
- Unclaimed Territory
- Andrew Sullivan
- Attytood
- Chi Tribune's The Swamp
- CJR's Campaign Desk
- CNN's Political Ticker
- CQ Politics
- FactCheck.org
- Gail Collins
- Howard Kurtz
- Mickey Kaus
- NBC's First Read
- Obit
- Political Wire
- Politico
- Politics Daily
- Pollster.com
- Real Clear Politics
- The Atlantic Wire
- The Fix
- The Moderate Voice
- The Plank
- USA Today On Politics
- Wonkette
