By Donna Brazile

 

Americans know what's wrong with the country. By a more than 2-to-1 ratio, Americans say "unemployment" rather than "government spending" is our nation's most important issue. So why do so many Republicans insist, despite the economic facts and popular will, that the "federal deficit" is the problem? During the Bush years, Republicans ran up the deficit like a kid running wild at a candy store. Ever since President Barack Obama started straightening things up, the deficit has become their boogeyman.
Before President Obama's proposal to boost economic growth and generate employment, the puppet masters of the Republican Party had already put their attack on American jobs through the spin cycle. In his pre-speech "Media Advisory," Boehner states he will "take a skeptical view of short-term fixes and gimmicks." Hiring a construction worker to help rebuild our infrastructure -- crumbling roads that will take years to repair -- is a "short-term fix"? Helping veterans get back into the work force, focusing on full-time employment so employees are eligible for health care -- this is a "gimmick"? No, this is a "give me a break."
We can't have a rational discussion about the economy, much less work together, because the Republicans talk in new-speak. Boehner loads up his words like he's got the American Jobs Act in a duck blind: "... short-term fixes and gimmicks that are labeled 'job creation' by politicians, but which actually impede economic growth." It's the shotgun approach, but sometimes the smoke-and-mirrors gets in the shooter's eyes. The proposals in the American Jobs Act have a history -- many originated with Republicans and almost all have a track record of working. (In fact, Boehner himself either proposed or voted for many of the provisions. But that was under Republican administrations.)
We need to pay attention to the words. For instance, there's the adverb that didn't get out of the way -- "actually" -- as if Boehner is some kind of soothsayer. Of course, some Republicans aren't so subtle. Gov. Rick Perry, for instance, prefers the rabble-rouser's approach to language, calling the president's proposals "traitorous."
It doesn't take much, though, to see what's really motivating the Republicans. Behind closed doors, which aren't always so closed, they can admit what's really driving them. Here's what Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina said: "If we vote for this plan, we'll own the economy with the president, and he desperately needs someone else to blame it on. If we vote against it, he's going to try to say Congress blocked his ability to create jobs."
Really? So it's not about the millions of Americans who can barely afford to keep a roof over their heads? It's not about the loss of dignity, the sense of futility, the senseless suffering that follows long-term unemployment?
I know that Democrats are just as heavily invested in next year's election as the Republicans. I know that working with the other party for the good of the people may not be good for politics. But there's a point where the play for power must yield to principle -- the principle that "we the people" elected representatives to promote the general welfare.
Cooperating with the president is the ethical, patriotic choice. His plan deserves a chance; the key provisions have had bipartisan support in the past. And they've worked. The proposals haven't changed; the politicians have.
Economists, who make their living understanding the macros and micros and markets -- have given the president's plan a vote of confidence. Wall Street professionals, who depend on financial forecasting -- correctly -- for their clients, support it.
Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody's, the Wall Street rating firm said the president's Job Act would grow the economy by two points and reduce unemployment by one point. That translates into billions of dollars of growth and hundreds of thousands of newly employed workers.
That doesn't sound like a "gimmick."
Pimco CEO Bill Gross told CNN's Piers Morgan: "Well, I think it's significant. ... If it's passed, you know, it could lead to hundreds of thousands of jobs."
Citigroup Chairman Richard Parsons said: "The president's focus on assisting small business is spot on, since small business is the engine of job creation."
When Big Business praises the president's plan, is it still just a "label"?
The economic forecasting firm Macroeconomic Advisers reported that Obama's Jobs Act would "raise nonfarm establishment employment by 1.3 million by the end of 2012 and 0.8 million by the end of 2013."
The Economic Policy Institute was even more optimistic, estimating that the legislation would increase employment by 4.3 million jobs over the next two years.
That's no "short-term fix." That's real jobs for real people. That's Obama's plan. That's the American Jobs Act Plan.
(Donna Brazile is a political commentator on CNN, ABC and NPR, and a contributing columnist to Roll Call, the newspaper of Capitol Hill.)