-------------------------
Via Workers World News Service
Reprinted from the Feb. 1, 1996
issue of Workers World newspaper
-------------------------
By David Perez
President Clinton acted like he had the wind in his sails when he gave his State of the Union address Jan. 23. The Republicans just sat there scowling through much of it.
But what kind of wind is it? And where is it coming from?
Clinton is catching the wind of opposition to the budget cuts coming from millions of workers, and he is hoping it will carry him through the election. So his style was aggressive.
But his substance was another thing.
His proposals designed to appear to help poor and working people were very limited. He wants to put off the Medicare and Medicaid cuts that will be so unpopular until after the election.
The president postured as champion of the "average American." That's not so difficult to do, given how extremely reactionary the Republicans in Congress are.
Compared with trolls like House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Senate Majority Leader--and presidential hopeful--Bob Dole, Clinton looked positively glowing.
As Malcolm X was fond of saying, however, the masses had better fight getting "hoodwinked and bamboozled" by the bosses and their representatives.
In his talk, Clinton emphasized that he shares most of the Republicans' goals. As if to underscore this, he shared a quick yuck about long speeches with Gingrich just before beginning his speech.
But Clinton did get serious. He boasted that his administration has axed 200,000 government jobs. He didn't mention that most of them, as the Government Employees union has pointed out, were held by African Americans.
The job cuts have not been much noticed, said Clinton with pride, because the remaining employees "are working harder." Translation: Layoffs and speedup are good for the work ethic--not to mention the bosses' wallets.
Another of Clinton's proud accomplishments: sending youths to defend U.S. big-business interests in Bosnia.
There were also "challenges" to Congress, such as raising the minimum wage. But when this came up last year, it didn't even make it to the floor of Congress--and Clinton did not lift a finger to push it.
What good is being for something progressive if you won't fight for it?
There was some good news in Clinton's speech--for bankers, that is. The president huffed that the federal government should "never, ever be shut down again." This referred to the recent partial government shutdown resulting from the budget battles.
There is speculation that another shutdown could occur soon if Congress and the White House don't agree on raising the government debt ceiling until a budget bill is passed. But not only government workers would be affected this time.
Interest on the debt is due to bondholders on Feb. 15. Over the next seven years, $2 trillion is slated to go to the banks and financial houses that hold the government's debt. This group of billionaires insists on getting paid. And Clinton vowed in his speech to do so.
The Republicans have hinted around about letting the government default on these debts. Wall Street doesn't take them seriously. It's understood that this is a ploy to get Clinton to give in on their whole cutback plan and not just most of it as he already has.
On Jan. 21, Rep. Dick Armey warned about default. This time he irritated the barons of finance capital. They're getting worried that even just the threat of default could have a psychological effect on the markets.
So none other than Alan Greenspan, head of the Federal Reserve Bank and a Republican, summoned Armey to a dressing down. The result appears to be a probable agreement on a stopgap spending bill to prevent default, although that won't be definite until the current spending bill expires on Jan. 26.
Dole didn't broach this issue when he delivered the Republicans' reply to Clinton's speech. Demanding more sacrifice, he denounced liberals and said he is against "big government," code words for the many social programs won through decades of struggle. But Clinton said that too.
The tone of the two candidates' speeches was different. But the content was not far apart.
- END -
(Copyright Workers World Service: Permission to reprint granted if source is cited. For more information contact Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail: ww@wwpublish.com. For subscription info send message to: ww-info@wwpublish.com.)