How Obama is selling the stimulus
James Forsyth 7:43pm
Obama gave a big-speech today promoting his stimulus plan. It was short on detail—there’s much Congressional horse-trading to come—but there were two passages that stood out. The first was Obama’s diagnosis of what has caused this economic collapse:
It’s interesting, and typical of Obama’s clever political positioning, that he cites excessive government spending as one of the causes.“This crisis did not happen solely by some accident of history or normal turn of the business cycle, and we won't get out of it by simply waiting for a better day to come, or relying on the worn-out dogmas of the past. We arrived at this point due to an era of profound irresponsibility that stretched from corporate boardrooms to the halls of power in Washington, DC. For years, too many Wall Street executives made imprudent and dangerous decisions, seeking profits with too little regard for risk, too little regulatory scrutiny, and too little accountability. Banks made loans without concern for whether borrowers could repay them, and some borrowers took advantage of cheap credit to take on debt they couldn't afford. Politicians spent taxpayer money without wisdom or discipline, and too often focused on scoring political points instead of the problems they were sent here to solve. The result has been a devastating loss of trust and confidence in our economy, our financial markets, and our government.”
The other passage that stood out to me was on regulation:
Bailing out the banks has hardly been popular with the voters and there’s more to come with another $350bn to be appropriated soon. Obama is, obviously, hoping to sweeten the pill with a public flogging of the fallen Masters of the Universe. Taken alongside the appointment of Obama’s friend and Harvard Law Professor Cass Sunstein to head the White House’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Obama’s words suggests that there will be a major restructuring of the US regulatory system, a system that failed almost as badly as Britain’s during this crisis, early in his administration.“it means reforming a weak and outdated regulatory system so that we can better withstand financial shocks and better protect consumers, investors, and businesses from the reckless greed and risk-taking that must never endanger our prosperity again.No longer can we allow Wall Street wrongdoers to slip through regulatory cracks. No longer can we allow special interests to put their thumbs on the economic scales. No longer can we allow the unscrupulous lending and borrowing that leads only to destructive cycles of bubble and bust.”
Previous
Nicholas
January 8th, 2009 8:13pm Report this comment". . . too little regulatory scrutiny" and "Politicians spent taxpayer money without wisdom or discipline, and too often focused on scoring political points instead of the problems they were sent here to solve." are observations that could apply equally here and coming from Obama would be difficult for Brown to refute.
The question is whether Brown Image plc will get there first and manage to spin this favourably with a few choice hoodwinks wrapped up in newspeak or whether Team Cameron will get up off their post-Christmas arses and go on the record to demonstrate how Obama's speech also points a big fat finger at the dodgy dealer from Kirkcaldy.
Outer Circle
January 8th, 2009 8:42pm Report this commentPity that many of his economic aides are heavily implicated in this disaster: Rubin, Summers, Geithner. I am sure there are more. Christopher Dodd's took a dodgy mortgage from Countrywide.
His halo will fall as the stimulus will only cushion the ongoing collapse. Still, he beats Bush.
Verity
January 8th, 2009 8:54pm Report this commentNo mention of ACORN, then. Or the fact that Obama was the second biggest beneficiary - out of almost 400 Congressmen - of grants from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae? Obama was even around five spots ahead of Nancy Pelosi.
Lance Grundy
January 8th, 2009 9:11pm Report this commentErr, didn’t the banks make "loans without concern for whether borrowers could repay them" because the American government forced them to as a result of Democrat President Clinton’s 1995 re-visiting of the Community Reinvestment Act?
Verity
January 9th, 2009 2:38am Report this commentThere is no such thing as "The Office of The President Elect". (William Ayers, anyone? Get it embedded?) Any more than there was any such thing as whatever was proposed on his fake podium in Berlin. He's a grabber. An alley player. Get it now! Don't wait for formalities, because they may not happen! Get it now!
The guy can't stop being a con man. Even though he will become president later this month, he cannot stop the impulse to grab it early.
cuffleyburgers
January 9th, 2009 8:12am Report this commentAn accurate assessment, and one which applies "equally if not more" over here.
This is a point which Cameron should be making.
Along with other posters I am losing patience with Cameron's reluctance to engage, given the sheer weight of evidence pointing to Brown's utter failure and the vast supply of brickbas to heave - perhaps he is standing there like a kid in aa sweet shop, mouth agog wondering which brightly coloured sugary lolly to go for first - well let me tell you something Cameron - IT DOESN'T MATTER, just go for it.
You have at your disposal at least five intelligent and well respected shadow ministers plus others (redwoods analyses of the developing crisis seem excellent) there should be blanket ad hominem attacks on Brown and Darling (not so much 'cos he's rubbish, but to destroy his morale and weaken his resolve to carry on covering Brown's substantial arse) oh and mandelson as well raining ridicule down on everything he has done for the last 10 years.
Point out the only thing he has got right was to stay out of the euro and he only did that to spite Blair? Pointing out that everything else has been characterised by waste, failure, unintended consequences. Do the numbers like you did on Bush the other day.
Or is the real tactic to lure Brown into a sense of false security so he calls an election? Very cunning!
John Moss
January 9th, 2009 9:21am Report this commentIs the upshot of the phrase, "Politicians spent taxpayer money without wisdom or discipline, and too often focused on scoring political points instead of the problems they were sent here to solve" that the Federal Budget needs to be restrained, returned to balance and the taxes of ordinary Americans reduced to stimulate demand, rather than excessive further Government borrowing to bail out those who made the mistakes in the first place?
Ian C
January 9th, 2009 10:52am Report this commentAnd his solution is for government to spend lots more money "wisely and responsibly"? A fundamental contradiction - with massive and fundamental implications.
Back to top