[克魯曼專欄]邦寧先生，地球是很危險滴 (原文載於10/03/04)

So the Bunning blockade is over. For days, Senator Jim Bunning of Kentucky exploited Senate rules to
block a one-month extension of unemployment benefits. In the end, he gave in, although not soon enough
to prevent an interruption of payments to around 100,000 workers.


參議員邦寧總算不再杯葛了，過去幾天來，肯塔基州的參議員吉姆‧邦寧濫用參院規章，不斷阻擋一項延長失業救濟一個月的法案。雖然最終他還是讓步了，卻打斷了將近十萬名勞工的失業給付。


But while the blockade is over, its lessons remain. Some of those lessons involve the spectacular
dysfunctionality of the Senate. What I want to focus on right now, however, is the incredible gap that has
opened up between the parties. Today, Democrats and Republicans live in different universes, both
intellectually and morally.


不過杯葛結束了，卻能從中學到教訓，像是參議院的功能嚴重失調之類的。然而我所要強調的，是兩黨之間橫著無法跨越的代溝。如今不管是理智上道德上，兩黨根本是不同宇宙次元的人。


Take the question of helping the unemployed in the middle of a deep slump. What Democrats believe is
what textbook economics says: that when the economy is deeply depressed, extending unemployment
benefits not only helps those in need, it also reduces unemployment. That’s because the economy’s
problem right now is lack of sufficient demand, and cash-strapped unemployed workers are likely to spend
their benefits. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office says that aid to the unemployed is one of the most
effective forms of economic stimulus, as measured by jobs created per dollar of outlay.


拿救助深陷泥沼的失業民眾來說好了，民主黨的理念一如經濟學課本所教：經濟深深衰退時，擴大失業救濟不僅幫助了那些需要幫忙的民眾，同時也可降低失業率。這是因為現在的經濟困境導因於需求不足，口袋空空的失業民眾拿到救濟便會去消費。事實上國會預算局也表示，以一美元支出所能創造的就業機會來衡量，失業補助是最有效的經濟刺激方案之一。


But that’s not how Republicans see it. Here’s what Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona, the second-ranking
Republican in the Senate, had to say when defending Mr. Bunning’s position (although not joining his
blockade): unemployment relief “doesn’t create new jobs. In fact, if anything, continuing to pay people
unemployment compensation is a disincentive for them to seek new work.”


可是共和黨可不這麼想。亞利桑那州的參議員，參院內共和黨的第二把交椅凱爾，在替邦寧先生辯護(雖然沒有一起參與杯葛)時說：失業救濟「不會創造就業機會。真要說會帶來什麼，就是讓失業者不想去找工作，反正有失業補助。」


In Mr. Kyl’s view, then, what we really need to worry about right now — with more than five unemployed
workers for every job opening, and long-term unemployment at its highest level since the Great
Depression — is whether we’re reducing the incentive of the unemployed to find jobs. To me, that’s a
bizarre point of view — but then, I don’t live in Mr. Kyl’s universe.


以凱爾先生的看法來說呢，儘管每一就業機會都有五名失業勞工要爭取，儘管長期失業率是大蕭條以來的最高點，但這些都無關緊要。我們真正要擔憂的，是小心不要讓失業民眾不想找工作。因為我不住在火星上，所以這看法對我來說實在不是地球人所能理解滴。


And the difference between the two universes isn’t just intellectual, it’s also moral.


另外不同之處不單只有理智，還有道德看法。


Bill Clinton famously told a suffering constituent, “I feel your pain.” But the thing is, he did and does —
while many other politicians clearly don’t. Or perhaps it would be fairer to say that the parties feel the pain
of different people.


柯林頓曾跟選民說過，「你們的痛苦，我感同身受。」而且他不光是說說而已，相較於許多政客只是嘴砲，他不僅坐而言且起而行。不過公平點，應該說兩黨感受到不同民眾的痛苦。


During the debate over unemployment benefits, Senator Jeff Merkley, a Democrat of Oregon, made a plea
for action on behalf of those in need. In response, Mr. Bunning blurted out an expletive. That was
undignified — but not that different, in substance, from the position of leading Republicans.


在失業救濟的辯論期間，民主黨籍的奧勒岡州參議員墨克禮答辯時表示，要拿出行動幫助那些需要援助之人，而邦寧先生的第一反應是飆髒話。這實在是成何體統，不過本質上這反應和共和黨領導人相同。


Consider, in particular, the position that Mr. Kyl has taken on a proposed bill that would extend
unemployment benefits and health insurance subsidies for the jobless for the rest of the year.
Republicans will block that bill, said Mr. Kyl, unless they get a “path forward fairly soon” on the estate tax.


想想在延長失業救濟和對失業者提供健保補助的法案上，凱爾先生所做的提案。他說除非在遺產稅上「能盡快通往公平之路」，否則共和黨會擋這法案擋到底。


Now, the House has already passed a bill that, by exempting the assets of couples up to $7 million, would
leave 99.75 percent of estates tax-free. But that doesn’t seem to be enough for Mr. Kyl; he’s willing to hold
up desperately needed aid to the unemployed on behalf of the remaining 0.25 percent. That’s a very clear
statement of priorities.


如今眾議院通過法案，提高門檻讓夫妻資產超過700萬美元的人才要付遺產稅，約99.75%的人因此免去此稅。但凱爾先生還是不滿意，為了那剩下0.25%的人，他繼續擋下這幫助失業民眾的法案。在他們心中哪些人比較高等，顯而易見。


So, as I said, the parties now live in different universes, both intellectually and morally. We can ask how
that happened; there, too, the parties live in different worlds. Republicans would say that it’s because
Democrats have moved sharply left: a Republican National Committee fund-raising plan acquired by
Politico suggests motivating donors by promising to “save the country from trending toward socialism.” I’d
say that it’s because Republicans have moved hard to the right, furiously rejecting ideas they used to
support. Indeed, the Obama health care plan strongly resembles past G.O.P. plans. But again, I don’t live
in their universe.


就如我所說，兩黨不論是理智還是道德都是不同次元的人。我們不禁要問：為什麼會變成這樣？共和黨會說是因為民主黨移到了極左派：共和黨全國委員會的募款計畫中，那些政客建議要保證說「我們要拯救國家免於步向社會主義」來激起捐款人熱情。我會說是因為共和黨移到了極右派，所以現在會憤怒的拒絕以往曾經支持的構想，像是歐巴馬的健保方案明明就跟過去共和黨的方案非常類似。不過再說一次，我畢竟不住在火星上。


More important, however, what are the implications of this total divergence in views?


不過更重要的是，為什麼會造成這兩種截然不同的觀點？


The answer, of course, is that bipartisanship is now a foolish dream. How can the parties agree on policy
when they have utterly different visions of how the economy works, when one party feels for the
unemployed, while the other weeps over affluent victims of the “death tax”?


真相永遠只有一個，就是兩黨合作只不過是個霉好單蠢的夢想罷了。一個黨關懷失業，另一個黨則為了「死亡稅」的富裕受害者落淚，兩黨對經濟看法完全南轅北轍，怎麼可能在政策上合作呢？


Which brings us to the central political issue right now: health care reform. If Congress enacts reform in
the next few weeks — and the odds are growing that it will — it will do so without any Republican votes.
Some people will decry this, insisting that President Obama should have tried harder to gain bipartisan
support. But that isn’t going to happen, on health care or anything else, for years to come.


回到目前政治角力的焦點：健保改革上吧。若國會能在數週內啟動改革(雖然成功率日漸令人起疑)，就不需要共和黨來投票通過。有些人強烈譴責，堅持歐巴馬總統要更努力的來爭取跨黨派支持。這是不可能的，不管是健保議題還是什麼事都好，未來幾年內都不可能成真的。


Someday, somehow, we as a nation will once again find ourselves living on the same planet. But for now,
we aren’t. And that’s just the way it is.


也許某天，我們又會發現原來大家都是地球人。但以現況來說，地球是很危險滴，你們還是快回火星去吧。