Your email address is safe with us. View our Privacy policy.
Author Bio:
Arianna Huffington, formerly a Republican, credits her shift in political views to colleagues Al Franken and Robert Scheer. Before her change in ...
Read more about By Arianna Huffington, Tribune Media Services.
Arianna Huffington, formerly a Republican, credits her shift in political views to colleagues Al Franken and Robert Scheer. Before her change in ...
Read more about By Arianna Huffington, Tribune Media Services.
Barack Obama Is Doing My Job; Why America Needs Him to Do His
By Arianna Huffington, Tribune Media Services
When it comes to dealing with Wall Street, President Obama seems to
have traded in his position as our economy's commander in chief for a
different role: pundit in chief. He and his top advisers are suddenly
very big on urging, advocating, recommending, strongly suggesting and
cajoling.
During his weekly radio address, which focused on the need to get America's banks lending to small businesses again (wasn't that the reason we bailed out the banks in the first place?), the president declared that "it's time for those banks to fulfill their responsibility to help ensure a wider recovery, a more secure system and more broadly shared prosperity." But "it's time for" is the kind of thing we pundits say: "It's time for the banks to do this and that. . . . It's time for Congress to do this and that. . . . It's time for the president to do this and that."
Then the president laid out his plan of action: "We're going to take every appropriate step to encourage them to meet those responsibilities."
Encourage them? How about make them? Columnists and bloggers encourage. Presidents execute. It's in the job description. Hence: the executive branch.
But when it involves America's banks, the White House all-too-frequently sounds as if it's just an innocent, helpless bystander -- and we get declarations like the one David Axelrod delivered on "This Week": "We have limited sway other than moral suasion with some of these (banks)."
Is moral suasion really all we can do?
And take this attempt by Robert Gibbs to show that the administration realizes that talk isn't enough -- while failing to realize that just realizing that talk isn't enough is, in fact, also not enough.
"This is not hope," he said at a daily briefing. "This is more."
He continued: "I think the president . . . has extremely strong views on this topic, on the topic of lending. And I think we hope that the actions of the bank will be demonstrated."
So I guess sometimes it's actually not more than hope. And as for Gibbs' comment that the president has "strong views": again, I have strong views. The president has the power to turn strong views into transformative policies.
And even when the president does move from hopes and views to actions, the actions he chooses are less than muscular.
Take the aforementioned central question of how to get banks lending to small businesses again. During his radio address, the president lamented the fact that "too many small business owners are still struggling to get the credit they need. These are the very taxpayers who stood by America's banks in a crisis -- and now it's time for our banks to stand by creditworthy small businesses, and make the loans they need to open their doors, grow their operations, and create new jobs."
So what does President Obama intend to do about it? He's going to (wait for it) . . . convene a conference.
"I've asked Tim Geithner and Karen Mills," the president announced last week, "to convene a conference in the coming weeks that will bring together regulators, congressional leaders, lenders and small businesses to determine what additional steps we can take to get credit flowing to small businesses that want to expand and create more jobs."
Convene a conference? You hear that small business owners? Your problems are about to be solved, because the most powerful person on the planet is going to "convene a conference," which means selecting the conferees, picking the location, handing out press releases, writing reports and then, my favorite part, ignoring the reports and patting each other on the back for a job -- or conference -- well done. I'm sure executives up and down Wall Street are shaking in their loafers.
Of course, we all know that in Washington-speak, "I'm going to convene a conference" is somewhere up there with "I'm going to establish a blue ribbon commission" in terms of kicking an issue down the road.
Because if this were really a high-priority for the administration, it could, you know, actually do something about it. Right now. The executive branch has plenty of weapons at its disposal to force banks still dependent on billions of dollars in taxpayer funds and guarantees to change behavior (yes, including
For starters, the president controls who runs the Fed. Instead of just giving Ben Bernanke the green light for a second term, he could have made it contingent on forcing Bernanke to open up the Fed to full transparency. In fact, there is a proposal for an audit of the Fed in the House now. It is, not surprisingly, being fought by the Fed. And the White House is silent on the subject.
The president also has the power to make other key appointments, including the head of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (who supervises the nation's commercial banks); the head of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; the head of the Office of Thrift Supervision (the primary regulator of savings and loans); the head of the Securities and Exchange Commission; and the head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (which oversees derivatives).
He also controls who runs the Treasury Department -- which, believe it or not, is not legally mandated to be overseen and staffed by former
And then there is the president's power to regulate. There are currently a number of proposals making their way through Congress to reform our financial regulatory system. And they all have something in common. Loopholes and exemptions. And lots of 'em.
For example, in an editorial on Sunday, The
Meanwhile, the fundamental structural problems that led to the collapse are still not being addressed. A sense of urgency and crisis was exploited when it was useful in persuading taxpayers of the need to bail out the banks. But now that the banks are no longer in crisis -- and it's just the rest of the country that is in trouble -- the sense of urgency has faded. Because nothing says lack of urgency like "convene a conference."
Elizabeth Warren, chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel, sums it up ominously: "All the things we were talking about that were serious, serious problems for the financial institutions seem to me are still serious, serious problems."
And Neel Kashkari, the former overseer of the TARP program under Bush, knows a lack of change when he sees it. "I think that the way that a Democratic administration talks about certain issues is probably a little different than the way a Republican administration does, and that's appropriate," he said. "But the substance of the actions, I think, are very consistent, and that's been important."
Important for Wall Street. And tragic for the rest of us -- both in terms of what hasn't been accomplished, and in terms of how much more misery it will lead to down the road. Misery that is avoidable -- if only Barack Obama would stop acting like a pundit, egging on change from the sideline, and start acting like the president, dictating the game from the middle of the field.
========
Arianna Huffington's e-mail address is arianna@huffingtonpost.com.
(c) 2008 Arianna Huffington. Distributed by Tribune Media Services, Inc.
This news arrived on: 10/28/2009
Printer Friendly Version | Send this page to a friend | Post Comment
Rate This Story:
Great - 5 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 - Bad
Posted Comments:
10-31-2009 02:47
JCE wrote:
Considering how congress has been dealing with the money, it is obvious that the president has to step in. He is supposed to protect us, from enemies, internal and external. And if you don't think what the big businesses and special interests are doing to the country isn't war, you must still have a fine job, and good health care. But the rest of the country is in need of some defense. It isn't that government can't do anything right. It is that they are doing what the special interests want them to do, and the people have just stood by with their thumbs up their buttts and let them. The government can do a fine job, when it wants to, and when the people do their job. It took a long time to get into this mess, and it will take a long time to get out of it. And since government action as well as inaction is at the heart of it, the government will have to undo some of its mistakes. And take on special interests.
10-30-2009 18:21
old cowboy wrote:
thank you, but
I thank those who sent the positive reactions to my post but...something does need to be done about health care. I am on medicare/medicade and work part time as a substite teacher. Much of the savings I put in different investments have been wiped out and see the market fell over 250pts today. There is no way I can afford even supplemental insurance as offered by AARP and others.
I have no solution but I do think the insurance companies, doctors and hospitals and pharmaceutical companies need to be reigned in
I have no solution but I do think the insurance companies, doctors and hospitals and pharmaceutical companies need to be reigned in
10-30-2009 16:27
rig wrote:
Old cowboy is right about blame which is exactly why we don't want government running anything. The smaller the government the better. If congress was truly worried about bonuses, why would they vote themselves a pay raise in a recession. They screwed up the economy so they should probably have voted themselves a paycut.
10-30-2009 16:20
rig wrote:
I don't recall seeing anywhere in the constitution that the president is the economic commander in chief. Congress is supposed to appropriate the money in this country. The president is commander in chief of the armed forces. When we get back to following the constitution in this country, we can finally get over this economic crisis. The government, both republican and especially democratic, more than any other institution created the mess we are in with its nanny state politics. If bills such as the health care bills and the cap and trade bills, that have been proposed, are passed the economic mess we are in will pale in comparison to what is going to happen economically. These bills will eventually render the constitution useless and government will gain a huge amount of power over the people, exactly what our founding fathers warned us against.
10-30-2009 15:50
JCE wrote:
If next week, we can get a good health care bill, and the republicans are stopped cold, and people not panicked or fooled by all the right wing propaganda, there is hope in fighting the special interests. Then people will have begun coming to grips with reality. Otherwise, the right wing propaganda machine, and special interests, will have won, again.
Comment archive | Comment FAQ's
 |
 |
View Arianna Huffington ezine stories by date or visit the complete archive |
The ArcaMax Politics channel is one of 70 content categories offered by ArcaMax Publishing on this ... |
VideoSquares.com
