So we got a debt deal, a downgrade and a Dow-fall. Consumer confidence is stuck lower than the gum on a miner’s shoe. And Americans now tell pollsters they’d rather dine with chain smokers and inebriates than with any member of Congress, though some fail to see the distinction.
But that was yesterday. Unfortunately, tomorrow’s unlikely to be better. Friday’s jobs report was the kind of good news we’ve come to expect. The nation added 154,000 private sector jobs and shed 37,000 government jobs — a 117,000 net pickup — and enough to drop the unemployment rate from 9.2 percent to 9.1 percent. With business hiring slowing and government cutting back, however, unemployment rates will remain high through 2012.
Credible economists speak cautiously about a double dip recession. Polarized politics reflect sharp differences in how the major parties respond to the economic crisis. At all levels of government, though, we anticipate continued austerity, even with tax increases.
The consequences of retrenchment come couched in appeals to religion. Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson wrote last week of the contrasting approaches advocated by two expressly Christian organizations: a liberal group called A Circle of Protection and the conservative Christians for a Sustainable Economy (CASE).
The two differ predictably. While agreeing on the need for fiscal responsibility, deficit reduction, and government’s obligation to provide a safety net for the poor and vulnerable — principles obviously shared widely outside the Christian community — the Circle wants to cut less and tax more. CASE rejects higher taxes as damaging to the economy and cites the moral imperative of reducing the debt burden for future generations.
Ultimately and unsurprisingly, people of faith disagree on public policy. We heard similar debates over welfare reform during the Clinton administration, when the arguments dealt with how to break the cycle of dependence. Then, too, adversaries accused each other of promoting “immoral” policy prescriptions.
Readers sometimes ask me how I reconcile fiscal conservatism with my faith. For me, it comes down to the difference between compassion and compulsion.
A friend recently referred me to a 1962 speech by Enoch Powell, a British Conservative political leader: “Compassion is something individual and voluntary. You cannot compel somebody to be compassionate; nor can you be vicariously compassionate by compelling somebody else. The Good Samaritan would have lost all merit if a Roman soldier were standing by the road with a drawn sword, telling him to get on with it and look after the injured stranger.”
That frames the distinction well, but doesn’t go far enough. A prosperous society has a responsibility to expand opportunity and care for those who cannot care for themselves. How best to do that is the proper subject of politics and economics. The faithful will find guidance in prayer and reflection. While religion clearly has a role in the public square, neither the religious right nor left speaks infallibly on political affairs.
Appeals to a peculiarly partisan morality surround assessments of the state budget. Washington State Labor Council president Jeff Johnson recently wrote, “…the Legislature acquiesced to the bad economy, national election results in 2010 and polling results to pass an immoral all cuts budget.”
His words echo those of Gov. Chris Gregoire, who said of her own proposal, “I don’t find it a moral budget.”
Unlike Congress, the Legislature cannot run on borrowed money. Lawmakers did what they could with what they had. And they knew what they didn’t have: the required supermajority to raise taxes.
When lawmakers finally reached agreement, the Senate’s lead budget writer, Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, said, “This budget reflects the struggles felt by families and businesses across the state. We’re all in this together — and by working together, we can produce a budget that we can all stand behind.”
The economic tumult adds to widespread expectations that falling revenues will force another budget reduction, perhaps before the end of the year. Education and social services — the bulk of state spending — face additional cuts. Members will struggle with priorities, their consciences, their faith, and their sense of right and wrong. They will disagree. Then they will vote.
It’s politics, not religion, and we shouldn’t cynically conflate them for partisan advantage. There’s also a time for charity.
Richard S. Davis, president of the Washington Research Council, writes on public policy, economics and politics. His email address is rsdavis@simeonpartners.com.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
