How the capitol wound up in Washington

Hugh Hewitt:
Jon Meacham's wonderful new biography, Thomas Jefferson: The Art of Power, has within it four pages of particular interest to today's governing class in D.C.

In late April 1790, the new United States was poised on its first fiscal cliff, a massive public debt held by many but not all states, dating from the Revolutionary War. Some states had acted responsibly toward their obligations. Others had not. The former did not want to bail out the latter, and the genius of the young republic's finances, Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton despaired of finding some way of persuading the recalcitrant to agree to have the federal government assume the debt and lay on the taxes and tariffs necessary to pay it off responsibly.

Thomas Jefferson, the secretary of state and Hamilton's opponent in theory and soon in practice, met the Treasury secretary in the street and began a conversation on the impasse which led to the grand bargain: federal assumption of the debt in exchange for the placement of the new nation's new capital on the Potomac. (Virginia and Maryland were among the responsible states which resisted transferring the debt to the national government.)

Today's "drama" is so much smaller than that of 1790, as it seems are the leaders and the capacity to see the outlines of the sort of "grand bargain" that would assist the country in righting itself.
... 
Jefferson was a spendthrift who was insolvent at the time of his death.  His heirs in the Democrat party seem bent on leaving the government in the same condition.

One of the other considerations in the placement of DC was to have a place about halfway between the Northern and Southern states so that it would be easier to get there from the various states.  If the same considerations were used today, it might be in Kansas.

As for a grand bargain today, I think it unlikely.  The Democrats don't seem to comprehend how their policies are driving us toward insolvency and they have no plan to deal with the obvious debt crisis.  All they have to offer is demagoguery and claims that the Republicans want to take food from the mouths of babies.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more