"Furthermore, and a point I really want to make very strongly, is that this is the first Administration since Herbert Hoover not to create a net gain in jobs in the course of its Administration"
About this Quote
Sarbanes wields a bureaucratic weapon with a historian's blade: “the first Administration since Herbert Hoover.” That isn’t a casual benchmark; it’s an accusation calibrated for maximum political shame. Hoover is less a president here than a shorthand for national trauma, a name that drags the Great Depression into the room and dares the audience to see the current White House as a replay of economic calamity. The line isn’t trying to win a debate on technicalities; it’s trying to seize the emotional high ground of competence.
The phrasing is telling. He opens with “Furthermore,” as if stacking evidence in a case file, then punctures the procedural tone with “a point I really want to make very strongly.” That little burst of plainspoken emphasis signals intent: he’s not merely offering statistics, he’s insisting on a narrative. “Net gain in jobs” is the key term. It anticipates the predictable rebuttal - that jobs were created at some moments, in some sectors - and shuts it down by defining success as the bottom line over an entire administration. It’s fiscal rhetoric disguised as common sense: did ordinary people end up better off, yes or no?
Context matters: late-20th-century job numbers were already a proxy war for ideology, trade, and trust in government. Sarbanes frames employment not as an economic variable but as a moral report card. The subtext is blunt: if you can’t deliver jobs, you don’t deserve power - and if you’re “since Hoover,” you don’t even deserve the benefit of historical forgetfulness.
The phrasing is telling. He opens with “Furthermore,” as if stacking evidence in a case file, then punctures the procedural tone with “a point I really want to make very strongly.” That little burst of plainspoken emphasis signals intent: he’s not merely offering statistics, he’s insisting on a narrative. “Net gain in jobs” is the key term. It anticipates the predictable rebuttal - that jobs were created at some moments, in some sectors - and shuts it down by defining success as the bottom line over an entire administration. It’s fiscal rhetoric disguised as common sense: did ordinary people end up better off, yes or no?
Context matters: late-20th-century job numbers were already a proxy war for ideology, trade, and trust in government. Sarbanes frames employment not as an economic variable but as a moral report card. The subtext is blunt: if you can’t deliver jobs, you don’t deserve power - and if you’re “since Hoover,” you don’t even deserve the benefit of historical forgetfulness.
Quote Details
| Topic | Work |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Paul
Add to List




