James Joyner at Outside the Beltway (a favorite blog) says:
I'm apparently in a silly mood this morning. I found this line from Andrew Sullivan more amusing than I should:"If you're a fiscal conservative, Howard Dean is beginning to look attractive."
My own take is that Andrew Sullivan is a very smart guy, but his analytical skills seem a bit rusty after a lengthy August vacation. For one thing, why would we expect Howard Dean to veer from the longstanding and unrelenting tax-and-spend policies of the Democratic Party? Bill Clinton, another governor from a small state and likewise armed with an arguably "moderate" record, supported the full Democratic agenda until forced by circumstances and Republican political success to cave in and act "moderately" on some issues.
The budget surpluses under Clinton cannot plausibly be ascribed to his policies but were due more to the long-term effects of Reagan-era changes, a Republican Congress in the 1980s, and the Internet boom -- a boom that we now know was powered largely by fraud and wishful thinking. Bush and the country are living through a hellish economy that was set in motion by forces that started well prior to the 2000 election. Bush is no true-blue economic conservative but he is not a profligate either.
For another, Dean talks the talk, but his own record is quite different. John McClaughry, a Vermonter and long-time Dean opponent, has a quite different take on Dean's tenure as governor in the WSJ this week:
On one occasion (in 1999) Dr. Dean did get the Legislature to lower income-tax rates 4% across the board. But aside from that one instance, Dr. Dean gladly spent all he could take in. In his early years, when he was still restricted by his predecessor's fiscal bailout program, he earned a respectable "B" on the Cato Institute's fiscal responsibility report card. By 2002 his ranking had dropped to "D."During his last eight years Dr. Dean signed into law increases in the sales and use, rooms, meals, liquor, cigarette and electrical-energy taxes. In 1997 he raised the corporate, telecommunications, bank-franchise and gasoline taxes. Dwarfing all of these was his approval of a state education finance "reform" built on a new 1.1% state real property tax. All of the 1997 tax rate increases were justified in the name of property-tax relief for some Vermonters, but the relief is rapidly evaporating with ever-increasing educational costs.
Dr. Dean as government manager does not compute. Attuned to political implications, his style has been to intervene at critical points rather than devote time, effort and political capital to creating efficient and predictable government. He used his influence to whisk favored applicants through Vermont's maddening tangle of environmental regulations, while ordinary small-business people trying to open a convenience store could only take a ticket and wait.
McClaughry concludes:
Many Americans are asking what kind of a president Howard Dean would make. Based on his 11 years as governor of Vermont, a reasonable person could fairly conclude that he would not make a very good one. This verdict is not based on his views on particular issues. It is based on a review of his autocratic style, his lack of ability to deal with bureaucratic management and his overwhelming commitment to his own political ambitions rather than to any recognizable principle.Posted by Alan at September 6, 2003 11:41 AMHe has run a brilliant pre-primary campaign. He is saying the things that energize the Angry Left of his party. He can boast of executive experience and, at least superficially, some fiscal conservatism. But as chief executive of a multitrillion-dollar enterprise and leader of the most powerful nation in a dangerous world, I believe that most Vermonters who have watched him closely as governor would, after sober reflection, agree that as president Howard Dean would be far, far, over his head.