Americaâ€™s Hope Against Hope
By Joseph E. Stiglitz
December 4, 2012
After a hard-fought election campaign, costing well in excess of $2 billion, it seems to many observers that not much has changed in American politics: Barack Obama is still President, the Republicans still control the House of Representatives, and the Democrats still have a majority in the Senate. With America facing a â€śfiscal cliffâ€ť â€“ automatic tax increases and spending cuts at the start of 2013 that will most likely drive the economy into recession unless bipartisan agreement on an alternative fiscal path is reached â€“ could there be anything worse than continued political gridlock?
In fact, the election had several salutary effects â€“ beyond showing that unbridled corporate spending could not buy an election, and that demographic changes in the United States may doom Republican extremism. The Republicansâ€™ explicit campaign of disenfranchisement in some states â€“ like Pennsylvania, where they tried to make it more difficult for African-Americans and Latinos to register to vote â€“ backfired: those whose rights were threatened were motivated to turn out and exercise them. In Massachusetts, Elizabeth Warren, a Harvard law professor and tireless warrior for reforms to protect ordinary citizens from banksâ€™ abusive practices, won a seat in the Senate.
Some of Mitt Romneyâ€™s advisers seemed taken aback by Obamaâ€™s victory: Wasnâ€™t the election supposed to be about economics? They were confident that Americans would forget how the Republicansâ€™ deregulatory zeal had brought the economy to the brink of ruin, and that voters had not noticed how their intransigence in Congress had prevented more effective policies from being pursued in the wake of the 2008 crisis. Voters, they assumed, would focus only on the current economic malaise.
Click here to read more.
(C) Project Syndicate