Brian writes:
Brian Beutler: Tangerines: Today's Gail Collins column has all the trappings of a column that I'd normally like, except that this particular version seems to imply that she hasn't been paying all that much attention:
Edwards is supposed to be the candidate with the “big, bold positions.” Asked for his top three priorities at a meeting with steelworkers here, he named four: end the war in Iraq; achieve universal health care; end global warming; end poverty and inequality in America.
Can you have this kind of to-do list without a price tag? Nobody expects politicians to dwell on the down side of their ideas. You just want some assurance that there’s an intellectual honesty at work, and that deep down, a candidate appreciates how tough big, bold change — or even small wishy-washy change — will be.
Broadly, the article is about the idea that a candidate (Edwards) should have an optimistic vision for the future, but should temper it with a bit of sober forthrightness about its associated costs. Will climate change legislation cost us money? Will universal health care cost us money?
I agree that we ought to see more of this brand of honesty--old school rhetoric undergirded by realism. But Edwards is really the last of the candidates who deserves to be the whipping boy for her critique. Here, for one, is Edwards on Meet the Press, saying basically exactly what he's said at most of the debates.
RUSSERT: Universal health care, noble goal, but that’s 47 million more men, women and children. How much would that cost and what kind of plan would you propose?
SEN. EDWARDS: It’d cost between 90 and 120 billion a year once it’s—once it’s fully implemented.
MR. RUSSERT: Would you be willing to raise taxes in order to help pay for this?
SEN. EDWARDS: Yes, we’ll have to raise taxes. The, the only way you can pay for a health care plan, from 90--that costs anywhere from $90 billion to $120 billion is there has to be a revenue source. The revenue source for paying for the plan that I’m proposing is, is first we get rid of George Bush’s tax cuts for people who make over $200,000 a year.
And on climate change?
If we don't act now, it will be too late. Our generation must be the one that says 'yes' to alternative, renewable fuels and ends forever our dependence on foreign oil. Our generation must be the one that accepts responsibility for conserving natural resources and demands the tools to do it. And our generation must be the one that builds the New Energy Economy. It won't be easy, but it is time to ask the American people to be patriotic about something other than war.
Edwards is putting forth lofty goals, yes, but he's also not really shying away from the fact that they'll... require the type of sacrifices you'd expect when trying to accomplish lofty goals. The flipside of this is probably Bill Richardson who has some lofty goals, but who also has a compulsive aversion to admitting (perhaps to himself even) that they'll require some tax hikes and sacrifices if they're to be achieved.
Comments