Last week Wednesday, Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin made her first speech on the floor of the United States Senate, and she took the opportunity to talk about fighting for everyday, middle class Wisconsinites, instead of well-connected interest groups.
Here’s some video.
A tepid first speech tinged with platitudes and dubious solutions. That’s not to say the disparity she raises isn’t real. It is. But, she’s demurred to the innovation economy, and she’s tacitly acknowledged “opportunity” but not “outcome.” Or that is to say, she’s applied a questionable inversion of the two. I would have preferred a speech with more encapsulation of wealth inequality and the role of government in modulating that gap. She seems to accept the NeoLib idea that ordinary Americans who are not entrepreneurs will somehow benefit from more entrepreneurial activity in the economy. To my way of thinking this is merely tertiary trickle-down economics. I’m displeased by Tammy Baldwin’s decision not to address first order solutions to the issues she raised. I’m equally displeased that she would invoke Fighting Bob LaFollette in one breath and in the next yield to entrepreneurial innovation as if it were somehow contrastive (in substance) with corporate hegemony. I don’t favor relying upon, mollifying or stimulating “job creators” to soothe our economic wounds. Nor do I favor situating the struggle Americans experience in only their employment status as Tammy Baldwin did in her first speech. Going the “big picture” route for her first speech makes sense. But, I’m displeased that Baldwin didn’t acknowledge the big picture in broader terms. Though she demonstrated that she is well-spoken; she didn’t distinguish herself well. That’s not a commentary on Baldwin’s legislative capabilities, but a comment on this speech only.