After writing five posts in five days on the increasingly-ridiculous debate over a “gas-tax holiday,” I was prepared to let the subject go. Really, I was. The NYT had an interesting item about the role of the gas-tax idea within the broader context of Clinton’s and Obama’s economic perspectives, but I read it thinking, “Must … avoid … topic ….”
But this morning, Hillary Clinton effectively taunted me into yet another post. It’s really not my fault; it’s hers.
Hillary Clinton has just started doing an Indiana town-hall meeting being broadcast on ABC, and George Stephanopoulos asked her a direct question: Could she name a single economist who agrees with her support for the gas tax holiday?
Hillary sidestepped the question, and tried to use the complete dearth of expert support for the idea to her advantage, pointing to it as proof that she’s on the side of ordinary folks against “elite opinion” — a phrase she used twice.
“I think we’ve been for the last seven years seeing a tremendous amount of government power and elite opinion behind policies that haven’t worked well for hard working Americans,” she said.
That banging sound you hear is me hitting my head against my desk.
First, Stephanopoulos’ question was pretty reasonable. The Huffington Post spent most of Thursday trying to find a single economist — left, right, center, Dem, Republican, even former Clinton administration officials — who could defend Clinton’s idea. Zero turned up. Literally, not one. That should give us a hint about the merit of the proposal.
Second, Clinton’s disgust for “elite opinion” is not only entirely out of character for her, it’s a textbook George W. Bush move. There’s just no excuse for any Democrat, especially one as sharp and knowledgeable as Clinton, to do this.
Indeed, the fact that Clinton can make these remarks with a straight face is rather disconcerting.
Seriously, “elite opinion” has been the driving force behind Bush’s failed policies? Since when? Reality shows the exact opposite — the policy experts have been warning everyone since Day One that Bush’s economic policy, his foreign policy, his environmental policy, his judicial policy, etc., are a disaster and a recipe for failure. In fact, Hillary Clinton has been citing these experts for years.
“Elite opinion” hasn’t been “behind policies that haven’t worked well for hard working Americans”; elite opinion has been pushing in the other direction. Bush hasn’t been operating with the support of policy experts; he’s been blowing off policy experts as liberal eggheads who think too much. And now Clinton appears ready to join him.
A bit later she added: “It’s really odd to me that arguing to give relief to a vast majority of Americans creates this incredible pushback… Elite opinion is always on the side of doing things that don’t benefit” the vast majority of the American people.
I suspect by the end of the week, Clinton will be railing against “The Man” who’s always “trying to keep us down.”
Consider an example. The NYT’s Paul Krugman is one of the most influential liberal thinkers in the country. He’s also been a pretty reliable ally of Hillary Clinton during the campaign. On this issue, though, Krugman has already explained how wrong Clinton is. Is it Clinton’s position that Paul Krugman is against policies that benefit most Americans? Is she now arguing that Krugman has stood behind policies that don’t work for hard working Americans?
If Clinton’s anti-intellectual, anti-expertise rhetoric sounds familiar, it’s because we’ve been listening to the Bush gang rail against elites in the exact same way for the last eight years.
Embracing intellectual obtuseness and deflecting criticism with charges of elitism is a tactic George Bush often deployed while campaigning. It’s striking to see Clinton do it because she has been a regular and harsh critic of Bush’s blindness to expert opinion. It’s even more striking to hear her aides actually sound like Bush administration officials.
When I asked Communications Director Howard Wolfson if the Clinton team could offer any intellectual ballast for the gas-tax vacation, given that so many policymakers had criticized it, he said, “The presidency requires leadership…. There are times when the president does something that the group of experts, quote unquote, does not agree with. Presidents get advice and then act, and that is what Senator Clinton is doing.” Or, as George Bush used to put it: A leader leads. Even if off a cliff.
The irony is, Clinton is at her best, her most impressive, and most inspiring when she’s showing off the depth of her knowledge. Policy Wonk Clinton is absolutely amazing — she knows details and policy minutiae better than almost anyone on the national stage. Policy Wonk Clinton loves studies, evidence, and reason. Policy Wonk Clinton is a bit like Al Gore, only with better political instincts and shrewder campaign skills. She’s the type of candidate I can really get excited about.
Policy Wonk Clinton, however, has left the building, and has been replaced with Shameless Pandering Clinton, who sounds like Bush while promoting John McCain’s gas-tax ideas.
The sooner we can get the real Clinton back, the better.