Until now, the Associated Press has actually done a credible job on economic reporting — but then again, this is a political analysis, not economic reporting, and it shows.  Paul Wiseman asserts that electing Republicans in the House will extend the current economic stagnation, thanks to increased uncertainty about regulation and tax policy.  Somehow that will risk our current miserable “recovery,” which we have because of uncertainty introduced by Democrats.

Huh?

A standoff between the Obama administration and emboldened Republicans will probably block any new help for an economy squeezed by slow growth and high unemployment. Congress might also create paralyzing uncertainty for investors and businesses by fighting over taxes, deficits, health care and financial regulation.

“We expect massive gridlock and little cooperation,” writes Brian Gardner, Washington analyst for the financial firm Keefe, Bruyette & Woods.

If times were good, gridlock wouldn’t matter so much. A Republican Congress and Democratic White House butted heads in the mid- and late ’90s, after all, and their sparring did nothing to derail a strong economy.

But now, nearly a year and a half after the official end of the Great Recession, the economy still isn’t growing fast enough to bring down unemployment, which is stuck at 9.6 percent.

Well, the reason why we’re nearly at zero growth 17 months after the end of the Great Recession is the economic and regulatory policies of the Democrats.  How much uncertainty have they introduced into the environment with total control of Washington?   They punted on the soon-to-increase income tax rates to avoid taking a vote before the election, and they have yet to pass even a budget resolution despite their 77-seat majority in the House and 18-seat majority in the Senate.

Frankly, it’s difficult to see how electing a Republican-controlled House would make the environment even less certain than it is now.  Wiseman says that by attempting to roll back legislation like ObamaCare where a presidential veto can stop it, the regulatory environment will become more ambiguous.  But that’s the same as saying that Obamanomics is a failure but changing it will worry people too much.  In the short term, it might seem a little less certain, but as the GOP defunds those initiatives, it will signal to investors that Republicans mean business and that the future looks less onerous.

JWF wonders what recovery the AP has seen that is so endangered:

Recovery? What recovery? If there was a recovery Democrats wouldn’t be facing a massive bloodbath today. It’s difficult to distinguish who’s more out of touch: the Democrats or their media hand-maidens.

This spin does seem more than a little overwrought.  According to economists, under current conditions, the economy will only grow 2.4% in 2011, which means we’ll have more than two years past the end of a recession with no appreciable job growth — a first for post-WWII America.  A change in direction is not only reasonable, it’s absolutely necessary, and it can’t wait for Barack Obama’s term to expire.