Deposing Canute for not turning back the tide

Over five months until the mid-term elections still remain, and the world of politics may change dramatically before then. But right now, all signs are pointing to a strong anti-incumbent sentiment among the voters. Not good news for the Democrats.

I understand why voters feel the way they do. And a vote to "throw the rascals out" makes sense to me, at the level of city or county councils. At that level, the incumbents may be crooked, they may be incompetent, their policies may simply be out of touch with voter sentiment. Toss 'em out. Reshuffle the deck. Bring in some new blood; let's see what a bunch of fresh faces can do.

But we're talking about Congress. No one really believes that the great majority of congressmen are either crooked or incompetent. Voters' antipathy is directed more toward the overall direction in which they see the country moving. Are these voters opposed to specific policies? It's hard to tell. Everyone's mad, but no one -- so far as I can tell -- has come forward with any specific alternative proposals.

The Republicans have lots of complaints about Obama and the Democrats, but what would they do differently? No bailouts? But that was a Bush proposal; the bailouts almost certainly saved the nation -- and the world -- from a financial collapse and another Great Depression. No health care reform, no re-imposition of regulatory controls on banks? Those were Democratic campaign promises, promises on which the Democrats swept into power. The libertarian solution -- keep the government's hands off the market economy, trust in the Invisible Hand, let the chips fall where they may? That was the Republican non-regulatory approach that -- at a minimum -- contributed to our current problems. That was also the philosophy that nearly toppled the financial system by letting Lehman Bros. go bankrupt.

Much of the current malaise is a reaction to the cold fact that the United States is losing the peculiar economic and military superiority it has enjoyed since World War II. For decades, we have correctly sought political stability by developing a strong world-wide economy. We are now experiencing some of the drawbacks, as well as advantages, of no longer being the only nation with an innovative and productive economy. We probably can find creative ways to adapt to these changes, but to blame the changes and the resulting economic dislocations on an administration of either party is like blaming Congress for a bad hurricane season.

The problem is not the competency of the current members of Congress. And if the problem instead is the policies pursued by the current majority, then voters should consider what alternatives their opponents would adopt in their place -- before they set out on a wholesale massacre of incumbents.

At least the current members of Congress -- Democrats and Republicans -- have some knowledge and experience in running the government. Why do we need replacements who lack that experience -- in the absence of any brilliant new ideas that might compensate for that lack?