With all due respect to Mr. Romney, I'm not sure this is a good idea:
Mitt Romney is calling for "something dramatic" to help the economy recover, but he's not saying exactly what.
The Republican presidential says he opposes another federal stimulus package and new government programs. He also says that if the Federal Reserve were to undertake another "massive" program of buying government bonds and mortgage-backed securities, with the goal of driving long-term interest rates even lower, it wouldn't help the recovery.
"I can absolutely make the case that now is the time for something dramatic and it is not the time to grow government. It's the time to create the incentives and the opportunities for entrepreneurs and businesses big and small to hire more people and that's going to happen," Romney said an interview aired Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union."
The trouble with "something dramatic" is that the potential for harmful unexpected consequences is just as great (maybe greater) than the potential for the hoped-for positive benefits. And I'm not sure how you make something dramatic compatible with the intention to not grow government.
Of course, signaling that you intend to get government mostly out of the economy's way might be considered dramatic by the people in our current overregulated, underappreciated private sector. Or at least such an announcement might have dramatic results. Just as investors hesitate when the future is either unknown or full of potential added expense, so they might unleash themselves if they think unreasonable barriers are going to be dismantled.