Rhetorical questions are the norm in the speech of Capitol Hill, but sometimes they cross into the land of self-evident, redundant tautology. A good example of this can be found during a session took place recently over China’s supposed hindrance of America’s economic recovery, which was reported by the New York Times on September 16, 2010.
At this particular meeting, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner explained to members of Congress that his department was urging the Chinese to “allow ‘significant, sustained appreciation’ of its undervalued currency.”
In response, Congressmen from both sides of the aisle made a series of unbelievably blatant soapbox speeches about how they deplored the Chinese dragon’s economic subterfuge.
Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) stated that “[t]here is no question that the economic and trade policies of China represent clear roadblocks to our recovery.”
He also remarked that, “I’ve listened to every administration, Democrats and Republicans, from Ronald Reagan to the current administration, say virtually the same thing. And China does basically whatever it wants, while we grow weaker and they grow stronger. It’s clearly time for a change in strategy.”
To me, this seems like a technique often seen in political theater on Capitol Hill. The reason being is that the answer is straightforward: China holds the fate of America in its hands in the form of US government debt. There can be no strategy until we, as a country, fix our federal budget system.
It’s just that simple.
His GOP colleague, Senator Richard Shelby, rehashed the same sentiment by saying, “The only question is: Why is the administration protecting China by refusing to designate it as a currency manipulator?”
Again, the answer is the same: China has us between a rock and a hard place in terms of our fiscal solvency. Obama and friends can’t and won’t play hardball with no cards to play due to partisan politics and budgetary mayhem.
Geithner demurred to these platitudes and continued on with the list of complaints against China’s economic policies, which included violations of intellectual property and heavy subsidies for exports and R&D.
For a government that’s committed to making our economy green, it’s funny how Obama’s policies don’t jive in the same way as his rhetoric. The unions can whine all they want, but it’s just babbling in the wind.
What about the WTO rules? Well…as they say, nice guys finish last.
The issue of subsidies is something that was of special concern of the United Steelworkers union, which had made a official complaint to the Federal Government about China regarding its subsidies to the green energy sector.
Geithner promised to “review [it] carefully.”
That’s code for doing nothing, while appeasing public or union sentiment. Whatever hope or change that you expected from Obama and pals is not likely to be forthcoming or in the way most people expected.
As I see it, poking the Chinese dragon in the eye doesn’t solve our problems. Call me callow if you want, but there’s no point in crying over spilled the milk that we call the US economy.