Melvin confirms Krugman’s analysis

by David Safier

Paul Krugman restates the obvious in today's column, but it needs to be restated. Conservatives want to "Starve the beast," the Beast being government, so they can use budget deficits to cut social programs.

The idea — propounded by many members of the conservative intelligentsia, from Alan Greenspan to Irving Kristol — was basically that sympathetic politicians should engage in a game of bait and switch. Rather than proposing unpopular spending cuts, Republicans would push through popular tax cuts, with the deliberate intention of worsening the government’s fiscal position. Spending cuts could then be sold as a necessity rather than a choice, the only way to eliminate an unsustainable budget deficit.

Sometimes, the truth confirming Krugman's statement comes from the mouths of conservatives, who usually know better than to say what they mean. Case in point: Al Melvin, soon after he was elected in 2008. He talked about the growing state budget deficit as a good thing.

". . . contrary to popular thought, difficult economic times are the best of times to get things fixed,” Melvin said.

“When everyone is on their knees, so to speak, from the adverse economic situation, you can get more accomplished in a fundamental way than you can if you’re flush with revenue and cash.”

In flush times, “nobody’s going to compromise, nobody’s going to do anything,” he continued. “Under these circumstances, you can effect fundamental change. I’m looking forward to it. We can make historic decisions that will benefit the state.” [bold face added]

Shorter Al Melvin:

Drastic budget deficits: Good. People on their knees because they're losing their jobs and their homes: Better. Now we can finally gut education and health care and all those poor-coddling social services.

Paul Krugman, meet Al Melvin, right wing poster child.