It is the defining moment in Obama’s presidency and he hasn’t even won the election. The US Congress is poised to give Hank Paulson, a Bush appointee, 700 billion dollars and dictatorial powers free from judicial review or any constraints, to bail out the banking sector. Ordinary citizens, having gone bankrupt, lose their houses. Banks, having gone bankrupt, will be bailed out, and the same people who caused them to go bankrupt will be left in control of them, so they can run them into the ground yet again.
If Obama does not tell Reid and Pelosi to stop this bill, he will be reduced not just to clean-up duty for the Bush administration, which was always going to part of his job, but he will do that cleanup on Bush’s and Paulson’s terms. If Obama would prefer that ordinary Americans should also get some help, too bad. If Obama would prefer that bank CEOs who ran their companies into the ground should lose their jobs, too bad. If Obama thinks that reforming the financial system is necessary as a condition of bailing it out, too bad.
But even though Obama gets to decide none of those things, he will get to pay for the bailout and he will have to do so with his tax cut plans and his spending plans, because Bush and Paulson are spending that money, right now. Bush will have his third term, Obama will just get to call himself President.
In 1932 Hoover offered FDR a deal. FDR could take power early to deal with the crisis, if only he agreed to take care of it as Hoover wished. FDR said "no way". This is Obama’s FDR moment. He can let Bush and Paulson define what his presidency will be about, how the crisis will be dealt with, or he can stand up and say "no way."
It’s time to end the old ways of doing things, the Bush ways, and to bring in real change.
It’s Obama’s time.
Related posts:
- Is Obama the New, Democratic Version of President Herbert Hoover?
- This Dumb’s for You: What We Will and Won’t Learn from the Obama-Gates “Teachable Moment”
- More Leaks That Obama Will Turn Deficit Hawk in 2010
- The Short Unhappy Life of a Keynesian Moment
- Van Jones: A Moment of Truth For Liberal Institutions in the Veal Pen
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
From your lips to God’s ear…
D is for Change!
good thing Obama has Rick Rubin on his team, he’s just the guy to have around to make sure the American Taxpayer doesn’t get screwed so the Wall Street Playaz can skate away as their reckless ponzi schemes implode.
Thanks Ian.
Digg It Ian
Damn, Ian, you drill right to the heart of the matter. Nice work!
This is the same Obama who let FISA go thorough. Good luck!
I believe fdr began his political career as a centrist, yet rose to the needs of this country and her future
let’s hope obama is that man today
Banks, having gone bankrupt, should become taxpayers property.
The people who caused them to go bankrupt, should hand over the keys and procees straight to Levenworth, designated as enemy combatants.
how about a few treason trials for these people. Here’s the definition: Oran’s Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as: “…[a]…or seriously injure the [parent nation].”
What’s an equitable solution for ordinary people? Complete debt forgiveness?
hey, I meant Robert Rubin, but with that kind of embarrasing gaffe in there, go ahead and decline the post. >hangs head and slinks away
I agree. He can’t let Bush dictate the terms of this agreement and tie Obama’s hands. Have you read any of this plan? It’s terrifying.
CalculatedRisk has some of the details.
Congress can’t go along with this.
when in the past this country faced her most feared moments, a hero rose.
we have in the past truly been blessed, a hero has rose
is obama the hero?…will he rise.
a hero must rise
Anybody want to bet?
you are dreaming
IMHO, Obama’s campaign will reason that they don’t want to do anything that might jeopardize their likely win, and will not risk a fight at this time. The caved over FISA and they’ll cave over $1T of additional debt and a free ride for the greedy thugs who brought this mess on.
Congress will do exactly what Paulson tells them to do and you won’t hear a peep out of any Ds.
Yea, it would be way better for him to make a symbolic stand that wouldn’t do shit but lose him the election. And people here talk about “concern trolls”. sheeeeeet
Ian, as usual you’ve nailed it. This Bush’s parting shot, ensuring that the next administration’s options are limited to carrying out his policies. If Obama allows Pelosi, Reid and Emanuel to roll over on Bush’s terms, he’s a one-term President. He’ll be powerless to steer the country onto a new course. Time for a major policy speech and shutting down this panicked giveaway before the new administration is stillborn.
I’ve said and thought that BushCo and the Repugs are creating booby-traps all over the place which will destroy any Democrat for a future permanent Repug rule….. Why don’t we just get out the hand cuffs out and put them on the Obama Administration right now if this goes forward……
Forget it, Ian. It’s Washingtown.
I’m in complete sympathy but I will be amazed if we hear even a peep out of Obama.
I doubt very seriously that Obama will oppose the bailout especially after after watching Kevin Phillips’ take on this mess on Bill Moyer’s Journal.
Spot on, Ian. I recall when the Bush/Cheney regime entered office Congress was tightening the purse strings due to the imminent recession. The neocon agenda was subsequently delayed until 9/11 brought them a cash bonanza. The constraints imposed on the next administration will be a hundred times greater.
Better he reverse himself on his position, lose the election, have the fascists take control, then have a revolution that will bring about a dictatorship of the proletariat. right
“As the financial crisis tested partisan allegiances and put the presidential candidates in treacherous terrain, he said he would “fully support” the Bush administration’s effort to prevent a collapse of financial markets.”
all the blogging in the world won’t change this, but go right ahead.
Look who Obama’s advisors are, the same people who played their part in allowing Republican economic theory to become policy which has led to the current financial Armegeddon.
WHo is advising Obama today? How do we both get congress to reject this proposal? How do we get folks who were not part of the problem placed in positions to be part of the solution. Is that at all possible?
How many of the five candidates on the previous thread are going to oppose this? Wonder why?
Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin et al
Will any of the bailed out have the courtesy to say thank you to all of us?
I want a thank you from every slob whose ass I’m saving.
In statements today, Obama supports Paulson. We assume he or his economic advisers read the pdf power grab Paulson wants. Given Pelosi, Hoyer and Reids DLC leaning, and Obamas “pragmatism” (read cave to the GOP), we will be burdened with more debt, less oversight and fewer programs in health care and education, regardless of which party gets the White House. The guys that caused the problem will get bonuses and the public gets the shaft!
So where are the ronpaulians on this?
After seeing Chris Dodd yesterday after their closed-door meeting with Bernanke, I’d say the legislative herd is pretty spooked. They’re more likely to stampede off a cliff at this point than engage in substantive debate.
slightly OT – Obama leading McCain in Indiana, per the result of a Thursday statewide poll from the IndyStar- 47-44%
Indiana has registered over a half-million new voters this year. That’s a nice chunk in a state which had fewer than 4 million registered voters as of the 2006 elections.
This state is in play!
I so agree. this moment is O’s moment of Zen. If he doesn’t take a stand here where else might he back down? He’s also telling us ultimately where he stands.. since he can easily stand against this rotten thign and have popular support.
Aren’t they still attending their convention at a Denny’s in St. Paul?
Doesn’t matter. Obama is exactly the same as McCain. If fact, this thread has just about convinced me to vote for John.
sure he can, and I’m Father Flannigan from Boys Town.
Question:
Can this be undone or mitigated in any way after 1/1/2009?
See BrasscheckTV.com for a very sharp analysis of the current fraud…there is no link for the written part, so you could sign up for the free email notifications to get the complete version of what is below.
Elliot Spitzer was taken down because of his fight against the Fraud currently being perpetrated on America!!
————
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/291.html
This is a long story, but if you have any interest
in what’s going on in the financial markets, I think
you’ll find it a more useful analysis than you’re
likely to find anywhere else.
Also, it’s an important set-up for today’s video.
Without this article, you’ll still get value from the
video, but with it, you’ll REALLY know what’s going
on better than most people on earth…including
financial news reporters.
I encourage you to invest the five minutes it will
take to read this. If not, you can skip to the link
at the bottom.
- Brasscheck
=========================================
*** A short explanation of how we got to where we are
Today’s banking crisis is the THIRD trillion dollar plus
US-caused financial meltdown in the last twenty years.
Each one of these crises came into being through the same basic
mechanism…the fraudulent over-valuing of financial assets by
Wall Street – with a “wink and a nod” (and sometimes a lot more)
from the White House and Congress.
The fraudulently valued assets stimulate the economy, impart
the illusion of health and then, inevitably, the fraud goes
too far and the whole house of card comes painfully crashing
back to earth.
The three trillion dollar plus frauds were:
Fraud #1: The so-called “Savings and Loan Crisis” of the late 80s
Fraud #2: The so-called “Tech Bubble” of the late 90s
Fraud #3: The so-called “Credit Crisis” of today
*** How the scam works
The mechanism of these frauds is simplicity itself…
…Take a shaky financial asset and blow up its value
and then sell as much of it as you can.
In the “Savings and Loan Crisis,” the instrument was junk bonds.
In the “Tech Bubble” it was Internet stocks.
In the “Credit Crisis” it was individual mortgages collected
into pools and then re-sold to investors.
In each case, normal, well established “bread and butter”
financial principles were consciously thrown away by Wall Street
with no hint of protest from federal regulators.
continued~~
aHAHAHAHA
A perfect call, Ian.
gee, beings that GEB has wielded unchecked power during his reign, I suppose Obama would have the same powers
sure it can. And then the market will collapse again, with the blame falling squarely on the D’s.
This one is the S.L.I.M.E. Act. The Successful Looting and Investment Manager Employment Act.
Will Obama eat it?
Which part?
Once upon a time in a faraway land, a strange beast was found. To find out about this beast, the ten greatest academics were assembled to study this beast and to determine its value and what its uses were. As they studied the beast, they would call out to one another the characteristics they were studying, one learned would be studying the shape and motion of the ear, another would be puzzling out the long proboscis like appendage from the head, another wondering at the utility of a tusk (or was that a tooth), still another was researching the stability of the large body while working closely with another who’s study of the engineering strength of a leg was progressing, still another was closely and studiously observing the movement of matter through an annal sphincter. There was even an academic to elucidate on the effectiveness of a small, hairy tasseled tail. And these academics would have discovered, had they not been blind, the wonders of an elephant, and would have been able to tell their discoveries to one another, if that faraway land had not been Babel.
Likewise with economics, all wise, all knowing, all Babelesque. Thanks for the light Ian
Seriously, I imagine the libertarians are opposed but fiscal restraint went out of fashion a long time ago.
I’ve been expecting you to for months now.
No, He is not exactly the same. You may not like him, but that statement is NOT accurate.
I’m definitely alarmed. Hoping and praying that the Dems fight this and frame their opposition in a way that Americans understand what’s at stake. God knows, that’s not their strong point.
And, thank you, Ian, I’ve filed away so many of your posts in an effort to understand the magnitude of what’s happening.
so, any public reaction from Spitzer?
I am incensed! I need to get this off my chest.
If Obama and the Dem leadership allow this swindle to happen in its present form I will never forgive them and believe I will give up on the process forever.
If this bail-out must happen then the Dems should insist on at least the following conditions.
Fist, it must be all paid for via confiscatory taxes on inherited wealth and on household incomes in excess of $500,000. And they should force the punk in chief to sign the tax legislation.It should also be an opportunity to properly get our national accounts in order and put all the war costs on budget.
Second, social security and medicare must be fully funded for the next 100 years with no decrease in the current level of benefitsor increase in the proposed retirement age.
Third, the Conyers medicare expansion must be a part of the package.
Fourth, no increase in the national debt.
Fifth, any financial insitution being bailed out should agree to limits on executive compensation. They are after all now government employees and should be paid as such.
sigh
Per Glenzilla:
The entire endeavor of the Bush administration has been to hollow out the American economy, not merely of this generation but for generations to come. What we’ve seen and are seeing is the most massive transfer of wealth imaginable.
It might not be accurate but it certainly is the logical extension of the vast majority of the comments on this thread.
Here’s a real doozie from just up thread
sure they will
The US Congress is poised to give Hank Paulson, a Bush appointee, 700 billion dollars and dictatorial powers free from judicial review or any constraints, to bail out the banking sector. Ordinary citizens, having gone bankrupt, lose their houses. Banks, having gone bankrupt, will be bailed out, and the same people who caused them to go bankrupt will be left in control of them, so they can run them into the ground yet again.
has any of this been translated, mutated, or in any way put into legislative language yet?
Or do we know even that?
Obama doesn’t talk tough, but he thinks tough (or so I like to think).
He’s going to have to raise taxes, and he’s going to have to do so by taxing the rich–a rather scary move for a politician whose campaign may end up costing $300 million (or something on that order).
So how will he go about it?
He will surely take his advice from the rich themselves: Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, Bill Clinton, and other prosperous people have argued in favor of higher income taxes for the past five years at least. They will get a hearing from Obama.
Whoa, Raven, we’re all on the same side here. And we’re all pissed but no need to attack each other.
Afternoon, all-
I would like nothing so much, privately, as to see Obama do exactly what is recomended-but political reality forces me to consider this. If Obama did stop this bill (I assume he could filibuster), he will be pilloried by the noise machine and its slavish acolytes in the MSM as “the man who caused the depression.” FDR said once: “I agree with you-now go out and make me do it.” This is the point. Without an uproar, a firestorm of public outrage to give him political cover, Obama would be ruined by election day. Don’t like it, but there it is, IMO.
I’m not attacking you.
The idea that:
1. the Democrats are going to fight this,
2. that they will win and frame it to explain what is at stake,
3. that the American people, who elected George Bush twice, would understand
it
are worthy of prayers because it will take a miracle for one, much less all three, of those things to happen.
Exactly. Camouflage the risk.
.
Well, there are 2 rec diaries at Kos, Glenzilla’s on it, Marcy says “NO” so maybe it will happen. We’ll see.
Doesn’t matter, he’d be popular of FDL. Maybe he could become a headliner?
It is unlikely Obama could stop the bill if he wanted to but he might be able to influence how it is written, perhaps allowing for greater oversight and adjustments down the road.
Having said that, I’m undoubtedly too far out of my depth to express a valid opinion, if so, please ignore.
Actually if the Dems use the slogan “The rich are fucking you again…up the ass” maybe Americans will get it. I have to go, you can all work on the phraseology.
I would hope so. I’d read him. I don’t agree with
a lotsome of his positions, but I do think he’s a brilliant man, and a subtle, perceptive thinker.well you did sum up the gist of it
never mind – just saw wigwam’s 53.
“Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency” [Sec. 8].
ok – that is such utter bullshit that I had to read it three times.
If the fucking D congress-cowards give in to that shit, – well, I don’t know what to say.
It’s blatantly unconstitutional – unfortunately, that hasn’t held up Democratic support in the past….
Judges take great care, and spend a lot of time worrying about, having their decisions researched and crafted to as to not be overturned. Is it too much to ask that Congress do at least that much?
That *is* covered in their oath, isn’t it? Or has it become “I hereby swear to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, against all enemies, foreign and domestic, at least when it is both convenient and politically advantageous“?
Obama is not yet President. In order to accomplish anything he must first become President. As of now he does not have the power to demand or enforce anything.
To become President he must carefully plot his course through this debacle without exposing himself to attacks as being an obstructionist to what most everybody rightly or wrongly considers a necessary action. I have enough confidence in his judgment and political abilities to assume he will do this.
He has already stated that we must take care of Main street along with Wall street and help actual people hurt by this disaster as well as the financial institutions. He will not necessarily be hamstrung by laws and policies made today. Laws and policies can be changed, and with a Democratic Congress and his ability to persuade that should not be an insurmountable obstacle.
We have two choices: McCain or Obama. That’s it. Is Obama perfect? No way. Is he better than McCain? That’s an understatement.
Will he, when he takes office, work to rectify whatever defects are going to be in the legislation now being proposed? Will he push for real reforms? Will he hold the criminals accountable? We can only hope, but we can hope.
Under the Bush plan, the public simply buys up $700B of vastly overpriced mortgages without loss or disruption to those who knowingly generated and trafficked in them. IMHO, we should get more for our money, e.g., controlling interest in those institutions and cash judgements against the members of their boads.
I am more confident that Obama will win than I have been in weeks but I am afraid now, it won’t mean that much. Obama will have to be FDR to the nth degree to fix this mess.
Actually I think I am too. Back to football.
We must be the outrage.
This is corporate socialism with no strings attached, a blank check for corporate privateers, a taxpayer bailout of pirates and bloodsuckers. There must be a price paid. And that price must be paid by George W Bush.
He must be made to fund this atrocity. If it’s so important, better revenue it, George.
Pelosi and Reid will not move the bill without Obama’s permission.
The seven hundred billion dollars in this massive clusterfuck will be gone by Inauguration Day, paid to Paulson’s buddies. Obama’s chance to change it is NOW.
Reid and Pelosi will not buck Obama on this if he comes out hard against it. That’s the word I’m getting. He’s the only person who can stop it, but he does have the power to do so. And it’s not “do this or do nothing”, Dems can institute their own plan. I suggested one yesterday, there are other possibilities as well.
Book Salon upstairs
*sinking feeling*
We have two choices: McCain or Obama. That’s it. Is Obama perfect? No way. Is he better than McCain? That’s an understatement.
Even if we had the old McCain (if indeed there ever was one) we still have about a 505 chance that Palin would succeed McCain in his first term.
That is beyond scary.
He must be made to fund this atrocity. If it’s so important, better revenue it, George.
I think he’s already funded all he’s gonna fund. He did say that he thought that much, or at least maybe some of this shit-pile of debt might somehow be paid back, right?
Some day? Maybe?
I do hope you are right, Ian. If you are then I expect there will be some major changes to the legislation proposed by Bush. I would expect Obama as President to want to have some control over those he is bailing out, I know I would.
I hate The Gator but I also hate the Whining Irish, so I switched over to MSU-ND. I wonder if that fat-ass coach will make it through the game.
The U is beating A&M. Go Canes!
There is no need to make whole everyone who currently owns these inflated mortgages. Yes, I believe that pension funds are worthy of public protection. Yes, I believe to maintain its worldwide credit, the U.S. may have to indemnify certain foreign governments. To the rest, “caveat emptor.”
Unless each of us is willing to accept the consequences for ordinary Americans of letting the banking system unravel, I don’t think we should be giving advice to Obama. It’s not just about AIG failing, it’s the fact that my modest money market fund and 401(k), both of which are funding my retirement, have loaned money to AIG, and if AIG is unable to pay that money back, I would be the loser. I resent being placed in this position; I’m as angry as anybody about the excesses that have led us to this point; I’m as skeptical as anyone about the proposed fix, but I can’t afford the uncertainty of saying reject this and let the chips fall. I have appreciated Obama’s thoughtful and deliberate statements about this; he has kept his head when others are losing theirs. It’s not a time to urge reckless, suicidal actions to Obama.
Waitin on them Dawgs
Right now, the other side has almost nothing to shoot at. If he digs in on this and the media go the other direction, it would be a sure lose for him. You saw how fragile his lead was against Sarah Palin’s sudden appearance on the scene. I seriously doubt that he’ll take a strong public stand. But it would be a pleasant surprise if he did.
You got it,I mean this is all great for some econ class but damn. . .
OT here is a prime example of Bush Justice!! The DOJ at its’ finest moment getting the bad guys!!
I don’t think it is an either/or proposition, as Ian pointed out:
It would require a harmonic convergence of luck and rhetorical skill seldom seen in Democrats today, but it could be done. Just highly unlikely.
If the people bails out AIG, the people should should acquire a controlling interest in AIG, and AIG’s board of directors should be held personally accountable; there was a severe lack of due dilligence on their part.
I was hearing financial news on NPR. The take away for me is that Congress is likely to be very, very wary. Plus, it is a short til recess, and they are being rushed. It sounded far from a done deal (like above, I am way out things I know about ;))
And I’m not a “concern troll” any more?
Please read Glenzilla’s posting for today. This is at least the third time they’ve pulled this last-minute-crisis stunt on congress.
Would you think they may have learned? Thanks
Hubris: arrogant pride
Great care must be exercised in wishing for something, in the advent that the wish is granted.
Cosmic justice: The Republicans getting John Sidney McCain III/Palin elected.
Cosmic Irony: the bankruptcy of ideas will bring down the mightiest of (economic) princes when their card castles fall.
Best Motto: Be Prepared, education, knowledge, facts, a working model of economics, politics and Law, a common language – Have a Plan.
OK. If we’re really willing to go this far, I don’t see why we can’t agree to assume the toxic assets in return for them selling to the treasury, at deeply discounted values, healthy assets (effectively, a series of massive swap transactions). The treasury then retires the most toxic assets into Toxicco, and takes the remaining but salvageable toxic assets together with the healthy assets, injects a sufficient quantity of treasuries, rebalances the mix, and then establishes a number of new, healthy banks (call them Resolution Trustco 1, 2, 3, etc). The offending banks, now stripped of many of their healthy and non-healthy assets are liquidated and their CEOs are sent to gitmo for re-training.
My co-blogger Charles states that the plan could actually work as advertised — if competent people were in charge of it. The problem, of course, is the Bushies are as incompetent as they are greedy.
http://phoenixwoman.wordpress……ay-grouch/
They know how to do two things: steal and lie.
To add to yours:
“A well-educated person, given the need, should be able to build a civilization.”
Finding something to be pleased about: Isn’t that a great picture of Sen. O? And he can put sentences together.
A well educated person IS the seed of civilization.
Krugman says NO DEAL to the bailout as leaked
Phenomenal speech by Hillary on Thursday, imo:
http://clinton.senate.gov/news…..?id=303208
also.. once their balance sheets are squeeky clean, shouldn’t precautions be put in place to cap exec compensation, so that their prodigal CEOs don’t reward themselves with jillion dollar packages for having extracted this incredle deal from the guvmint.
How many have we seen go to jail or walk off with a massive golden parachute? It’s been a regular TV series of these people….and no one made any major change.
ian – that was fucking brilliant. perfect.
do you think that pelosi and reid would do what paulson tells them to do if obama publicly called on them not to? i don’t.
pelosi and reid are cowards. and that means that if their party’s leader calls on them to act for the good of the country, they won’t have the courage to torpedo him – and by extension themselves because they need obama to do well in november inorder for the dscc and dccc to do well.
obama now has a second chance to prove he is not a coward, that he will put the good of the country ahead of his own self interest. he failed miserably on fisa. but that need not define him forever – but only if he chooses to make it so.
i’ve been very critical of obama – but if rises to the occasion on this one, i will be very happy to grovel before everyone who gave me a hard time for my lack of faith, etc.
Awww…no need to grovel…just find yourself welcome. These are rocky times
thanks revbev – but i would seriously be happy to grovel, if only there was reason to. from ian’s finger tips to where ever it needs to go, if obama fails us on this one he will indeed have taken another action to show he is bush’s heir and not fdr’s.
but if obama acts as ian has proposed – then he will have shown us that he rejects bush’s legacy with his actions as well as with his words. may it be so.
The Dems are going to be just as bad as the Republicans on this I think. It’s going to be disgusting what they do with our money.
I sure hope I’m wrong, but I’m not holding out hope. We really need a third party, don’t we? Someone who actually represents the people. This will prove once and for all that there is very little difference between Rs and Ds, it’s just a matter of a few degrees.
These people who raped and pillaged the markets deserve nothing.
Your post nailed it. I am sick.
dugg
Thanks for the link.
New Post up; you won’t like it either.
some day’s i’m tempted by the thought. but most days i think that if we have not yet learned to hold the Ds accountable, why would act any differently with another party?
i think the first thing we need to change is ourselves – and then we’ll know if another party is needed. or not.
p.s. i’m not suggesting any particular way of holding our party accountable – other than always judging them by the same standards we use for our opposition. and never cutting them any slack, just because there is a D after their name.
Ian, I have to strongly disagree with your construction of the 1932-33 history of the Hoover-FDR transition period. Moreover, should Obama win, our understanding of what actually happened in that Hoover-FDR transition will be useful knowledge, allowing us to comprehend the traps that must be avoided.
It is true that Hoover attempted to pull FDR into endorsing many of his plans after FDR had defeated him in November, and before the March 4th Inauguration. However, after November 8th, FDR had a mandate (won all but 6 states), and while there were no polls in those days, Hoover had zilch standing. FDR understood power, and that as of March 4 he would have it, but prior to that date, he had none except at Governor of New York till the first of the year, and it was in his interests to leave Hoover with the responsibility for EVERYTHING when he left office, and then take full responsibility when he assumed office. They had profoundly different ideology and belief systems — Hoover did not believe Government should intervene in the Market, FDR did, and had campaigned on that platform. FDR made that clear during the transition, and as the depression deepened during that winter, the anticipation that the New Deal would be “something different” was heightened. He would neither bless anything Hoover might do, nor would he strongly criticize it — instead he kept pointing to Hoover being responsible until he left office in March. Yes — there were persons who Hoover sent to meet with FDR — and FDR chose to meet with the Secretary of State, Stimson — who had served as Sec of War in Taft’s administration, State in Hoover’s, and ultimately would be Secretary of War in FDR and Truman’s administration. But while FDR was willing to talk generally about Foreign Policy with Stimson, and receive Hoover’s messages about economic matters, FDR made absolutely no commitments. In fact for most of February, FDR went on a cruise and fishing trip along the coast of Florida, and spent several weeks in Warm Springs swimming with his Polio Patients in rehab.
But in fact what FDR did during his first days in the Presidency was pretty much what had been proposed by Hoover’s Secretary of the Treasury, (Bank Holiday — Emergency Banking Act). Only in the last few days before March 4th, was he willing to allow his nominated Secretary of the Treasury meet with Hoover’s people, and in fact the Emergency Banking Act was largely written by Thomas Lamont, head of JP Morgan (yea, that Lamont family,) who FDR subsequently fed to the wolves on the Hill for a series of indepth congressional investigations into pre-crash Wall Street Practices, that FDR cheer led over the next couple of years. All of these actions were essentially about power — FDR needed as much as he could get, unshared, in order to sustain his ability to convince congress and the public to allow market interventions in a big way (Regulation, Bank Inspections, and vast expenditures for public works). He acted so that on assuming the office he would be able to take that power. Part of doing that was making clear that until noon, March 4, 1933, the whole thing was Hoover’s responsibility — and then real power would shift.
I suspect Obama has people around him who know this political history, because some of the things he has done really point that way. With respect to many issues, he points to Bush and says “one President at a time.” He holds back from either blessing or sanctioning details. He points to the big shit-pile and says big mess resulting from a flawed economic philosophy. He recites his CHANGE mantra. If voters want something else — then consider how you vote this fall. All this is as much about getting elected as getting some sort of mandate for change — and that is very much about getting power to act, power to guide Congress, but not now — not till the voters decide.
I frankly could care less about who Obama meets with for consultations at this point. Those familiar faces from the Clinton Years may bring some votes to the box in November — they don’t tell us who would be selected to be in the Cabinet. They don’t put potential policies up front to be kicked like a ragged football during the campaign. (FDR never defined the New Deal in detail during the 1932 Campaign. In fact, he spent a good part of the campaign talking about the blessings of a balanced budget.) The more he quotes John McCain about the glories of running the US Health Care System the way Wall Street runs the Banking System — fine. All of this is about getting the votes to get elected in the first place, and then to really assume power and create his own working power center, which is, afterall, what is necessary for any change.
I think that is the proper read of FDR’s approach to the 1932-33 transition, and I suspect Obama’s people are smart enough to update it, and use it profitably.
except that he has never shown that “change” is anything more than how he is being sold to us. it’s not only about his advisors – it’s about the fact that almost everything he’s done screams same-old same-old.
he’s asking us to take him on faith.
Obama as FDR … good luck with that.
Like Sara @ 212 and others, my goal is to get Obama elected because it does make a difference whether it’s McCain or Obama. Let’s look at Obama’s record and compare it to what McCain has done. The following comparisons are how various interest groups rate the performance of each candidate on issues that they know and care about. All ratings are for 2007 unless otherwise noted.
League of Conservation Voters:
Obama – 67%
McCain – 0%
NARAL:
Obama – 100 %
McCain – 0%
ACLU:
Obama – 80%
McCain 50%
National Education Association
Obama – A
McCain – F
Campaign for America’s Future (energy issues)
Obama – 100%
McCain – 17%
Children’s Defense Fund:
Obama – 100% (2006)
McCain – 10% (2006)
Citizens for Global Solutions (foreign aid & policy issues)
Obama – A (2008)
McCain – F (2008)
AFL-CIO:
Obama – 100%
McCain – 0%
Americans for Democratic Action:
Obama – 75%
McCain -10%
Alliance for Retired Americans:
Obama – 100%
McCain – 0%
Disabled American Veterans:
Obama – 80% (2006)
McCain – 20% (2006)
NOW:
Obama – 91% (2006)
McCain – 13% (2006)
They don’t look the same to me.
If Obama supports the $700 trillion bailout w/ no strings attached, I will not vote for President this November, and I will urge everyone I know to do the same.
I will not vote for any Dem that supports it. I do live in a swing state.
Nothing Hoover was doing or wanted to do would tie FDR’s hands the way that Paulson’s plan would tie Obama’s, to put it mildly. FDR could afford to say “no way” and sit back, because Hoover was fundamentally an honorable man who knew that even if he was still president, he no longer had a mandate.
If Obama lets this go through, Paulson will have spent at least the 700 billion and probably more, by the time Obama gets in power. He will have set the terms for the bailout, and his terms are “no penalties, no investigations, status quo ante”.
FDR refused to endorse Hoover’s plans, and as such Hoover held them off and only those parts that FDR agreed with were implemented when FDR took power.
Bush and Paulson are not going to do the same thing for Obama, not if they have a choice.
He can fight back, or he can let them make his first term, Bush’s third.
And don’t forget, any negative repurcussions of the “Bush Bailout” will occur on Obama’s watch, and therefore, be ALL HIS FAULT.