True, that's how the politics of spending always has worked. It's more the size the commitment (nearly $800 billion) than the novelty of it that disturbs. Federal spending, which accounts for 21 percent of the national wealth, is headed toward 30 percent. If you like Big Government, you're in luck.
We keep hearing from the Democrats that we have to do things this way because the old "theories" of slow government growth and encouragement of the private sector have been shown up. Why, just look! Indeed, let's look. Among other outrages we see Congress encouraging the reckless provision of home mortgages to people who can't make the payments. We see the Federal Reserve keeping interest rates artificially low, hence subsidizing many of the crazy loans and loan bundles we now complain about. We see new government spending programs (e.g., prescription drugs for Medicare patients) on every hand.
No political party causes an economic smash-up. We know Republicans got drunk on the same punch as everyone else. Beat 'em with a buggy whip in that case. Only let's not mistake Big Government intervention, with the taxes such intervention entails, as the remedy for the failures of, ugh, politicians. One might with equal efficacy prescribe a 10-mile hike for bunion pain.
The immediate challenge is philosophical in nature, not just economic. It is to brush aside criticism from the left concerning bankers, tax cuts, deregulation and such stuff; or else to answer such criticism with the pointed notation that Big Government everywhere -- always -- without exception -- causes more economic problems than it cures.
Show me a country where government runs the economy. I'll show you, hmmm, Venezuela, North Korea, Iran, Russia, Cuba, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Burma .