A jobs agenda or a Billionaire Bailout?
Though I've been guilty of it myself, I've come to loathe the "What ___ Should Do" genre of pontificating. However, Steve Benen comes up with an especially good one that I happen to agree with and have been planning to pitch myself next week once the politicians are paying attention again.
I realize that the likelihood of Congress passing anything in this environment is, to put it charitably, remote. If Republicans aren't willing to let the Senate vote on extended unemployment benefits, and House Republicans were willing to lay off tens of thousands of school teachers, then winning a vote on job creation is almost certainly impossible.Seems simple enough to me. Dems put together a simple bill, no complicated amendments, clearly designed to create jobs. Not just save existing jobs, but create decent paying employment for the millions who are out of work and dare the GOP to fight them on it.
But why not have the fight anyway? Why not force Republicans to fight against a jobs bill two months before the elections? Why not let the public see exactly what both sides want to do to give the economy a boost, and determine which is preferable?
Why not ask voters which they prefer -- a jobs agenda or a Billionaire Bailout?