Presidential transitions are notoriously perilous interludes. The normal calculus of power and responsibility is upended. In recent decades there was seldom enough occurring for it to matter all that much. But that’s not the case now. And just in the last day or so it’s crystallized in my mind that we may be on track for some serious problems.
First, the management of the almost trillion dollars of bailout money. It’s good news that Paulson has dropped the entire toxic debt reverse auction idea in favor of direct infusions of capital into the financial services companies. But there’s an unmistakable make-it-up-as-you go-along
quality to it. And while that’s probably inevitable and even benign to some degree, there’s a lot of hundreds of billions of dollars being assigned by people who will be able to wash their hands of the whole matter in about two months. And that’s a problem.
Next, the auto industry. Could GM really go under in the next couple months because the Democrats who’d bail the company out are currently at the mercy of the electorally discredited Republicans who want to use the crisis to crush one of the last major manufacturing unions? The continued existence of a domestic auto industry is more than a strictly economic issue. Henry Blodget says we should use the money for “on retraining and job placement than on propping up perpetually weak companies that can’t fix themselves.” I assume he’s making a move into comedy. Because job training and placement into what exactly? Maybe he’s become another Bob Reich on worker retraining. But what jobs does he imagine we’re going to feed these often older workers into in anything like the short or near term in the middle of a massive recession? Whatever you think should happen it should happen as a matter of considered national policy, not because the Democrats won’t be able to break a filibuster or overcome a veto until late January.
I’m inclined to think that at least in the short-term GM may be bluffing, that if relief is in the offing in 60 days that they can find some way to hold on until then. At least I hope so.
Moments of national crisis require experimentation and open minds. But more than anything they demand energy and direction, a plan — one where the different moving parts interlock together in some rational way. But this feels like drift.
My morning review of Atrios for economic analysis and news confirms/deepens my concerns expressed below. His point more seems to be delay rather than the lack of some broader plan. But I think these are more points of emphasis than anything.
Discredited McCain foreign policy advisor Randy Scheunemann on Sarah Palin. He says he found her “brilliant.”
Things are not looking good for Sen. Ted Stevens as the Alaska vote count drags on.
Pat Leahy demands Joe Lieberman’s ouster as chairman of Homeland Security Committee.
BlogAds is running its fifth annual reader survey. We’d really appreciate it if you could take a few minutes to answer their questions. Having good demographic data about you allows us to sell the ads that keep TPM online and growing.
TPM Reader RS …
Here is something progressives really need to address. On Sunday morning political shows, three Democrats are confirmed as guests: Carl Levin, Barney Frank, and Charlie Rangel. It’s as if Democrats didn’t just win huge electoral advances in the Presidential, House, and Senate elections. So we get the same thing we’ve had the past 8 years–republican hegemony on Sunday. Kyl? Check. Gingrich? Check. Steele? Check. Jindal and Shelby? Check and check? Just look at The Page for the whole list. When is the “liberal media” going to give some of the oxygen to Democrats?
This is unquestionably true. The bookers and producers of the Sunday shows are committed to the continuing dominance of conservative/Republican marquee guests. No question about it. And this is going to be one part of the rewiring of Washington that will take longer and face more resistance than possibly any other. The big interests and institutions that go to Washington to buy influence are quickly reacting to the changing political complexion of the city. The TV bookers and opinion act like nothing’s happened.
We’ve been fielding emails all day in response to this morning’s post on ‘drift‘. And the ones that have particularly stuck out to me are the ones about bailing out the auto industry. Quite a few readers are of the opinion either that the Big Three are ground central for global warming and/or they’ve spent thirty years making cars that can’t compete with Japan, etc., so just let them fail. It’s over. They’ve had their chance. It’s done.
I have to tell you this just strikes me as nuts — and beyond being nuts represents a great failure of imagination.
The auto industry — directly and indirectly — employs a ton of people. Even in ordinary times having that all gone down the tubes would mean a massive shock to the economy. If we can avoid having that happen now, why would we possibly let them happen in the face of what already promises to be a massive recession?
Second, on the question of the environment. There is no question that the internal combustion engine is at the heart of the climate crisis. But getting rid of Detroit won’t get rid of cars. More to the point of creativity — one of the things about crisis is that it opens opportunities would never exist in normal times. People have been looking for ways to get Detroit to get serious about developing cleaner, more fuel efficient cars for years. At this point, we’re beyond that. We need to get serious about cars that don’t use gas at all. If the whole domestic auto industry is all but asking to be taken into federal receivership, that tells me that the people running the federal government now have quite a lot of leverage.
I don’t pretend to know the mechanics or precise solutions. But these are times that call for boldness — and more than just boldness, which gets said a lot — but creativity to rises to the challenge of the moment.
Bernie Sanders joins Pat Leahy in calling for Joe Lieberman to be stripped of his chairmanship.