Larry Womack

Larry Womack

Posted: September 24, 2008 08:45 PM

Or, You Could Lead


It is a fantastic parting statement from the Bush administration, an effort to codify the unwritten law that this presidency years ago proved -- that rich screw-ups are this nation's nobility.

It is also essentially an act of armed robbery on a previously unheard-of scale. If the American people don't throw a couple thousand dollars each into the bag, our entire economy is about to get a bullet through the temple. Congress was supposed to hand over the bills and stop trembling only after the Bush gang had vanished into the sunset, as they had done so many times before.

But some of the townsfolk have had enough. This time -- it so far seems -- people like Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Charles Schumer, Nancy Pelosi and yes, John Boehner at least had the good sense to start marking the bills. So where are the men who would be their leader, Barack Obama and John McCain? They were those jittery guys in the back, silently debating whether they should jump the gunman or jump off the train.

Of course, we're not really talking about two guys back in the caboose. Obama and McCain are members of the US Senate. Obama serves on the Labor and Pensions Committee. McCain serves on the Commerce Committee. At the moment, both also happen to be the leaders of the two major American parties, and each hopes to manage the economy as chief executive in just four months' time. Every single one of these positions gives them some degree of obligation to or interest in this process.

After a rather good and clear initial statement from Obama (seven talking points, followed by backtracking on some of the key ones,) a long, sad and confused series of stumbles by McCain landed the two at essentially the same positions: "Yes, the plan is necessary, but it is also patently and profoundly flawed. It doesn't change my economic plans... until maybe it does. And no, I am not telling you whether or not I will actually vote for it."

Then came the most disturbing part of the entire ordeal--their stalling. How quiet were these guys? Until earlier today, nobody even knew if they were even going to show up to vote on the thing. They had arrived at their safe, no-brainer positions and were waiting to attack when the other guy said something new. Finally, a joint statement was the only way out of their standoff. Finally, George W. Bush--who is hardly Mister Action in times of crisis--had to summon the pair back to Washington to participate in the process.

Now, let me be clear: I believe the bailout, if only for lack of a better alternative, is necessary. And if public perception becomes that it has fallen apart, I do believe that the economic consequences could be incredibly severe. I am not suggesting for one moment that either of these men come out against some serious form of intervention.

But let us not pretend that this is the best rescue plan we can come up with. This isn't even a solution so much as a consolation. As far as hopes for solvency go, it's hardly Glass-Steagall or even the Emergency Banking Act. As far as chances for a return on taxpayer investment goes, it's a far, far cry from the establishment of the RTC. As presented by the Bush administration, this was nothing but a blank check to be signed over to people who have already proved they know how to lose other people's money. We can do a better job of this -- even make money at it, if we do it right.

And let us also not pretend that this bailout can happen without these two actually voting in favor, not just showing up to the bargaining table. This bailout, though probably a necessary move, is going to be unpopular by nature. There are a lot of people in Congress who aren't committed in part or entirely because they don't know where the other side's nominee stands. They don't want to go back to their constituents as the bailout guy, when the top of the other ticket might be the screw-the-Wall-Street-fat-cats-and-save-taxpayer-money guy. When two candidates negotiate a statement that says a plan "must not fail," it means they're open to blaming someone else if it does. It's not enough to convince skeptical legislators that you're actually going to vote for it even if the end product contains things you find objectionable.

John McCain, in an ironic application of his "America first" marketing slogan, managed to break his long silence while simultaneously taking lack of leadership on this issue to a whole new level. Rather than put forward ideas to help make the bill more workable, or dig America out of this hole, he called to suspend the campaign until the bailout deal is officially struck. Mind you, the candidates were to be spending much of this week preparing for a debate McCain now wants to call off. But then, if I had spent the last ten days rocking violently between "everything's great, bailouts are evil," and "we're all done for, oh God, give the man your jewelry," I would probably want to call a time out, too. Pure politics, presented as anti-politics.

Still, I'll grant him the breather if I can be spared the pain of ever again witnessing the pained manner in which he has detailed his basic understanding of the issue at hand.

For his part, Obama responded to McCain's request by announcing that he believes bankruptcy provisions and the stimulus package -- you know, the relief actually targeted at the middle class -- should be left out of the bailout deal. This is showing, "as great a sense of urgency about the emergency on Main Street as we do about the problems on Wall Street"?

To Obama's credit, he did work in the zinger, "It is going to be part of the president's job to deal with more than one thing at once." A great line, and very true. But what if McCain had broken the silence with something a little less dumb? Forgive the remote hypothetical.

For the moment, our jittery candidates have emerged to agree in their own little ways that the details of this trillion dollar deal are just too important to quibble over. While I certainly agree that partisan bickering shouldn't for one moment be allowed to risk an economic catastrophe, isn't there something a little discomforting about how lost they both seem after being thrown off script? Isn't this a time to speak up, if you want to lead the free world?

Allow me to humbly propound an alternative to calling a "time out," something that would make myself and I'm sure many other voters feel a little better: The men who hope to lead this nation through future crises could use their current positions as leader of their respective parties to actually show leadership during this time of crisis. Tell America that you're officially on board, even if it means voting for something that could be very imperfect. Or, if you want to get really wild, show good leadership by helping to fix the problem. Find more workable solutions to protect their investment--why let Chuck Schumer have all the fun?

In short, lead. It sounds crazy, I know. But if you're really fit to be the chief executive of this country, it just might work.

 
 
  • Comments
  • 20
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
JBS
Part time misanthrope & full time curmudgeon
03:43 PM on 09/25/2008
Even lacking a better alternative, handing over $700 Billion dollars OR MORE of the to a bunch of Wall Street Rip-Off artists with NO ACCOUNTABILITY, NO EQUITY, and NO REPAYMENT is NOT necessary.

Letting the entire house of cards come tumbling down is a better alternative to robbing the poor to give to the rich.
12:46 PM on 09/25/2008
Ah, but there are alternatives to the trickle down gang's blackmail. We can only give them some of the money now, and the rest when they stop holding the country hostage. We could decide trickle down doesn't work and instead use the money to fund programs that would put more Americans to work, like FDR did. Then the people who are in danger of forclosure (which is the cause of the whole mess) can get decent jobs and NOT be forclosed. Percolate up is proven to work. Trickle down is a proven failure. This 700,000,000,000 bandaid is just following a proven failure in economic theory. Their threats worked to get us into an illegal, immoral war. Their threats put our entire economy in danger. Let the big money guys fail. Let 'em. New big guys will take their place. If we fix the root of the problem-the forclosure mess, the problem will sort itself out. Trickle down has been so thoroughly screamed into people's heads they can't hear the truth. Enough with the extortion.
02:11 PM on 09/25/2008
FDR put people to work by making up pretend jobs. There were well over 3 million folks with such jobs for the majority of years in his first two terms. Many of FDRs policies prolonged the depression and even made it worse. The current so called "trickle-down economy" has been in progress since 1982 and has experience only two very short recessions (1990 and 2001) with near full employment every year and low inflation. Before trickle-down there was high unemployment, high inflation, low productivity gains, and several very nasty recessions.
03:15 PM on 09/25/2008
Trickle down works except for the icky Depression thingy being held over our heads. and the fact the real wages of the middle class and poor went down and the rich got richer. Nope, sorry, trickle down doesn't work, except of course the transfer of wealth from the many to the few. And what makes you think many of the jobs at investment banks isn't "pretend jobs" ? What exactly do they create? A mess is what they create. Trickle down is an amoral farce.
03:21 PM on 09/25/2008
People working in those "pretend" jobs built much of the infrastructure in our National Parks - much of which is still serviceable 70-plus years later. Obviously those "pretend" workers attained a somewhat higher quality standard than KBR has managed with their electrified showers and other goodies in Iraq.

Nice fairy tales about FDR and trickle-on economics. Just keep repeating "greed is good"
10:12 AM on 09/25/2008
THANK YOU!

I too feel neither candidate has handles this very well. I already knew McCain/Palin wouldn't have much to say (understatement) but I was expecting at least an uplifting Obama speech or a fiery Biden rant.
But nothing really, other than a sugar coated version of the crap sandwich Paulson laid out on the table. They call this 'bipartisanship' but eveytime I hear that word I shudder. It usually means something bad is about to happen to me.

The proposed 'bipartisan' solution? Instead of taking all your blood at once, we get to have it drained out slowly, over time.

Why don't I feel better?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:23 AM on 09/25/2008
You do not "bail out this country" by including a paragraph that transforms an Executive Branch official into a prince.
08:02 AM on 09/25/2008
Mister President, Cabinet, Advisors, Members of Congress:

What do you think happens when one of us---us meaning the 99% of Americans who fund YOUR kind of people's lifestyle---what do you happens when one of us loses control of our car and damages other people and their property?

Think we can just walk away from the mishap and say, "Oops, sorry, and oh, by the way, I need each of you who are busy pulling out the injured, staunching the flow of blood and picking through the wreckage of your belongings to take a minute and write me personal checks to replace my totaled Cadillac Escalade here. See, I'm going to a party at Lady Astor's with the Queen of Sheba next week and I need to travel in style."

No. Of course not. Either our insurance pays (and we won't get into the predatory nature of THAT sordid business), or we get taken to court and our wages garnished and assets liquidated to help pay the cost of damage we caused. And, often we go to jail whether we pay or not.

So, Mister President and Thief-In-Chief who famously poses as "one of us" : I'm afraid you mis-heard us.

We aren't saying "bail".

We're saying, "jail".

JAIL! JAIL! JAIL!
09:15 AM on 09/25/2008
It's not "99% of Americans" that pay the federal income taxes. Over half of US adults don't pay any federal income tax at all. The top 1% of wage earners pay 40% of all federal income tax. The top 5% of earners pay 60%. The top 25% pay 86%. It's the wealthy folks who will be paying the most and the most successful Americans who will be paying the rest -- or it just adds numbers to the national debt and the Chinese can buy more bonds to make up for it. Plus, it appears there is a good chance the US government will make money on this package anyway, so it's possible tax payers won't lose a penny.
schatsie
banks are more dangerous than standing armies
10:09 AM on 09/25/2008
yes, but you have to realize that the government collects MORE PAYROLL TAXES than income taxes and that the government has been 'borrowing the surplus' to give tax breaks to the wealthy..

Get REAL, the top 1% collects 40% of the salaries AND 80% of the capital gains and dividends and interest....I saw something that indicated that Salaries are less than 1/2 of the income in this country, that Dividends and Capital Gains, etc are actually 50% of the take...

Are you saying that any body on this earth is really worth a 400 million dollar PENSION, or a Million Dollar a year pension? Get real, these white guys are all circle jerking the rest of us with their interconnnected boards of directors....
12:39 PM on 09/25/2008
If you want to educate yourself, read Michael Hudson. http://www.counterpunch.org
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fishgirl26
Flyfishing Montana Native:)
02:33 PM on 09/25/2008
As an insurance agent, I can tell you that at least in my state, insurance is WAY more regulated than banking. We actually have to go to classes to keep our licenses and if we make a mistake they pull your license FOREVER!!! AND, as someone who was hit by an uninsured motorist and had to sue my own insurance company for payment because the person that didn't have insurance skipped away scott free I can tell you that THOSE people are why your rates are so high!!

Make no mistake, I feel like I am being taken also. What the goverment has done is taken us hostage and told us this is the only way out. I certainly hope someone reads a damn book about FDR before they get elected and LEARN A LESSON FROM HIM!!!
02:03 AM on 09/25/2008
I think your assertion that Obama was stalling is off base, and your suggestion that he could lead by inserting himself in the effort to craft a bill doesn't just sound crazy. It is crazy. That wouldn't be leadership. It would be meddling. We don't have a bill that is ready for anyone to take a position on. It has to be developed in committee. Obama did what he should have done and stated the principles he wanted to see addressed by the bill, whether you agree with him or not. As for McCain, he's so out of it, the best way he can serve the process is by going back to sleep.
12:14 AM on 09/25/2008
and so it looks as though the republicans will allow some executive compensation restrictions and the democrats will forego any effort to help the homeowners facing foreclosure or watching their equity evaporate. great trade barney and chris!!! way to help out the little guy. the rich executives will get their money if they haven't already and the banks will know they can continue to gouge the borrowers and foreclosures will rise and people will lose their jobs and then when we need to bail out the country we will realize that we gave all the money to wall street and those con artists are living at their private island retreats and lauging all the way to the bank where they stashed their golden parachute cash long ago. but a lot of americans will buy into the pretense that the democrats stood up to the elite. we must finally learn that the politicians are part of the elite too. but maybe we are too stupid, naive, or idealistic to figure this out.
11:37 PM on 09/24/2008
Neither Obama nor McCain are directly responsible for this mess at the moment. Obama has issued his guidelines for a bailout - what more do you want? McCain has let his campaign go missing in action.

The Buck stops with Bush for now. In January, Obama will inherit what few bucks are left and fix the mess.
12:39 PM on 09/25/2008
He won't be able to fix it.
10:20 PM on 09/24/2008
Call this what it is. The Republicans are stick up artists robbing our bank.
The Democrats are the cops who tell us they are trying to stop the robbery, thereby providing crowd control. They stop the angry mob from forming because the mob believes those cops (Democrats) will look after their interests.

Is the mob awake yet? Some of us are.
09:48 PM on 09/24/2008
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED is coddling the rich billionaires of America!
I'm no longer an undecided voter.

McCain's Repub. handlers definitely do not want a McCain DEBATE with Obama on the economy Friday. Imagine some of the questions that McCain would have to answer.

MCCAIN wants to CUT & RUN-- Cowardly.

McCain and his VP pick are always shielded from saying anything to media for fear they'll screw up. That's not leadership--that's abominable!
I've had it with that republican circus sideshow. No more years for corrupt republican liars.

My vote's for
common sense & competence: Obama-Biden.