• Comment (4)

Two Fundamental Flaws With Obama's State of the Union Message

January 23, 2012 RSS Feed Print

David M. Primo is a senior scholar at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University and an associate professor of political science and business administration at the University of Rochester.

President Obama plans to use Tuesday night's State of the Union address to lay out a "blueprint for an economy that's built to last," and he'll no doubt spend some of his time maligning the so-called gridlock in Washington. There are two faulty premises at work here, yet I predict that these assumptions will go relatively unchallenged in coverage of the speech.

[See a collection of political cartoons on the economy.]

Premise one is that the federal government can improve the economy by waving a magic policy wand—create a jobs program here, an infrastructure program there, and abracadabra, recovery! A common misconception is that all presidents, not just President Obama, have the ability to direct the economy as if it is a ship. The reality is far different. The economy is enormously complex, and government intervention may do more harm than good. The most important role for the federal government is to maintain an effective rule of law and policy stability so that businesses can plan for the future. Instead of trying to micromanage the direction of the economy, the president should instead focus on what he (and Congress) can control: burdensome and ever-changing regulations, and the coming crisis in entitlements.

Premise two is that gridlock is necessarily a bad thing. A natural implication of this premise is that more activity out of Washington must be a good thing. But is this really true? Policy change is only positive—and gridlock is only negative—if the reform improves on current policy. Judging from the new government programs and complicated new regulations coming out of Washington in the past decade, perhaps what we need is more gridlock in some areas (new government programs and regulations) and less in others (long-term, sustainable entitlement reform).

Tags:
State of the Union,
economy,
Obama administration,
2012 presidential election

Reader Comments Read all comments (4)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Obummer's response to this would be wait and see the next 6 trillion I spend just might help. The man doesn't have a clue lets face it people

jerry bouchet of KY 3:35PM January 31, 2012

Gridlock is good. The Framers designed a government to have as much gridlock as possible. They knew that government would try to take away our rights, so figured in the absence of politicians passing laws, we would be left free. The fewer laws Congress passes the better. Better yet, how about a moratorium on new laws for 5 years. It would be the best thing for the economy, short of removing the ones already on the books.

Bill Wright of CA 10:21PM January 26, 2012

Hey Bill,

Can you show me in that really long, unrelated rant where the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and Medicare Part D are figured in? Thanks!

uncle_chester of IL 10:13AM January 24, 2012

Economic Intelligence

Insights, perspectives, and commentary on the economy. Follow it on Twitter @EconomicIntel.

advertisement

Latest Videos

advertisement