Who will stand up for the status quo? It`s hard to find anyone here who claims it. Somewhere, deep in the bureaucracy, there might be a hidden fan of S.Q. But he or she is bound to be ashamed to admit it.
George Bush certainly wants none of it. He is spending much of his time running against it. Vice President Dan Quayle on television Sunday said that the administration most definitely does not represent the status quo.
If you go up on Capitol Hill and try to find a S.Q. supporter, you will see members of Congress running for cover. They, especially, do not want to be associated with it, blamed for it or mentioned with it in the same breath.
To say anyone here in the nation`s capital represents things as they are, I suppose, is a form of McCarthyism.
One of Washington`s nightmares is that some future Joe McCarthy would set up a new version of the now-defunct House Un-American Activites Committee. Instead of communists, it would finger those responsible for the current situation, as well as their fellow travelers.
S.Q. members and their sympathizers would quiver with fear over the ultimate question: ”Have you ever, or did you ever, belong to a group associated with, or espousing the principles of, the Status Quo?” In their sanest moments, they would consider taking the 5th rather than owning up.
The status quo finds its supporters only when ceremony and official duty arise, when White House parties, bill signings and inaugurations confirm the pecking order of public power. But then this very visible government seems to disembody at the first sign of problems. Poof, it`s gone.
Is the S.Q. the dark plot of some kind of secret society that rules the country with evil aim? Is it some Darth Vader who surreptitiously controls the hated but powerful military-industrial complex with an iron hand? Is it the result of fascistic conservatives or socialistic liberals?
No, you don`t have to look too far for the culprit: us. It is hard to say this in a nation that loves conspiracy and delights in blaming others.
Surely, many of you will say, Bush and Quayle bear some responsibility for sitting on their haunches for more than three years while the economy floundered. Surely Congress, that great center of inaction except when it comes to raising its pay or bouncing its own checks, bears enormous blame.
And what about Alan Greenspan, the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board? From the beginning, he never saw a recession coming and couldn`t bringhimself to believe it was happening until it was too late. Doesn`t he also bear some responsibility?
But of course. They all played a role, a major role. And they are just as guilty as the next in denying that they had anything to do with the economic mess we are in.
Still, they don`t hold a candle to us. Leave it to Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) to say the unthinkable. ”The voters,” he said at a recent dinner with the press corps, ”aren`t so hot either.”
Who demanded tax cuts, maximum military protection, continued social benefits and no reduction in Social Security-and still complained about the deficit? Who bought the imported cars and electronic products that made our trade deficit worse?
Who consumed as if there were no tomorrow? Who fought every effort at energy conservation, especially if it meant higher gasoline taxes that might be put to good use? Who demanded that the airline industry be deregulated, despite fears that it would lead many companies to bankruptcy?
Who sat back in silence while the public schools with their corrupt forms of administration deteriorated, demanding only that they perform a baby-sitting function?
More Top Picks Best Electric Snow Blowers
Shareholders of U.S. companies cheered crippling takeovers, because they gave them a windfall of wealth. It did not seem to matter if the company was permanently weakened by debt, or disappeared.
Many Americans with savings, especially the elderly, loved high interest rates, the result of big deficits and tight money. They parked their money in certificates of deposit that often paid them double-digit returns. As they raked in nice returns, capital-starved industry suffered under the yoke of high interest rates.
In 1973, the growth of U.S. productivity, the source of our wealth and economic strength, slowed to a trickle, from 3 percent a year to less than 1 percent a year. This was almost 20 years ago, and yet very little has been done about it since, despite the fact there have been three hair-curling recessions and two stock market crashes.
Americans refuse to learn anything about the economy, except to support that which is in their financial self-interest. The latest elixirs, a middle- class tax cut and a tax credit for first-time homebuyers, pander to this epidemic superficiality.
Why should anyone be surprised that Bush and Congress run away from the status quo? It seems no one wants to claim it.