The Change We Need
Does President-Elect Obama represent the change we need? His mainstream appointments -- largely veterans of the Clinton administration -- have sparked a clamor from worried supporters. But in one of the critical challenges facing the country -- how to get the country out of what will be the worst downturn since the Great Depression -- Obama is calling for dramatic and long overdue change. While President Bush continues to oppose any major plan for Main Street, Obama has been calling for a substantial recovery program, focused on public investments rather than tax cuts.
His chief economic advisor, Clinton's former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, suggests a "speedy, substantial and sustained" fiscal stimulus, at levels of $350 billion a year or more. A key question is whether the stimulus will be strategic -- investing in areas vital to our future, rather than in simple one-off expenditures for temporary effect.
On this Obama seems clear. The centerpiece of his plan is a down payment towards moving to energy independence and dealing with global warming. He'll generate green jobs by investing in retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency, in modernizing the electric grid, in pushing renewable energy, mass transit, and retooling the auto industry.
He could also sensibly use the crisis to make college more affordable again. The cost of college has doubled under President Bush. Grant programs haven't kept pace. States have been limiting their support. Students have had to take on more and more debt to pay the bill.
Now in the crisis, all will get much worse. Tuition and costs are increasing, as states cut even more costs. Teachers are getting laid off; construction projects stalled; class sizes will increase. As private lenders abandon the student loan area, loans are still available -- but the costs and debt burdens are likely to rise.
For this country to prosper as a high wage society in a global economy, we will need greater education for students, particularly in the skill oriented community colleges that are being hit hardest in the downturn. Obama would be wise to raise Pell grants -- the grants that go to neediest students back to the level they once were, when the maximum grant covered about 75% of college costs. That would cost $35 billion a year. The money would be spent immediately -- and it would keep kids in college and off the unemployment rolls.
Critics argue that the spending program should be temporary -- one-time tax rebates, or one-off investments that involve no long term commitments, and can be ended when the economy starts to grow. If we make a downpayment on strategic investments now, they warn, we'll have to find a way to pay for them when the economy recovers.
Exactly. The fact is that we've been starving vital public investments for decades. Just as conservatives pushed for massive tax cuts as a back door way to force cuts in government spending, Obama should be making vital investments as part of the deficit-funded stimulus as a backdoor way to strengthen the argument for paying for these investments in the long run.
A big time recovery plan for Main Street focused on the investments we need is one key element of the change we need. And one that President Obama surely supports.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Yup!! Clinton Three has been launched which will be replaced in four to eight years with Bush/Jindel Four and then possibly possibly Bush/Palin Five. You asked for it-You got it so goes the old commercial.
Happy nightmares suckers.
This sure as hell isn't my idea of real change.
So far, Obama is on the right track - investment in America and the middle-class. Bush did all he could to ruin the backbone of America and he is still doing it. I cannot wait until January 20th!! We should have impeached both Bush and Cheney in 2004.
We are in a recession and this recession has been going on for the past year. Obama has a lot of problems to solve and they are not going to be solved in one or two years, it is going to take much longer than that. He is doing his best by appointing the people that he has trust in.
His father was a very intelligent and strong man. Let out President elect do his job.
Just be happy that George Bush is leaving asap!!! George had an interview w/Charles Gibson(abc news) and he said that he would be leaving his presidency with his head up.
He is leaving this presidency with the lowest rating of any United States president in history.
Bush should resign now!
That would just give Cheney the chance to start a war on the way out. Cheney makes Bush look like Mother Theresa.
Barack Obama has said repeatedly that this current financial situation is 'the worst fiscal crisis since the Great Depression'. That would make sense, if you were listening to the media.
,The overall output of the GDP has declined by somewhere around 1/2 of 1 percent. When they make the actual figures known sometime early next month, that figure may go even lower depending upon the final result.
Comparing that decline to what happened at the outset of the Great Depression when output dropped by over 30 percent and unemployment rose to 25%, the current decline isn't all that bad.
What the Democrats are doing is trying to change public opinion so that they can fundamentally change an economy so much, that politicians in Washington will be micro-managing businesses all across our great country. The current capitalist economy has been successful for more than two centuries. Like the old saying says, 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it'.
The scary part is, and Treasury Secretary Paulson played right into the Democrats hand on this, what has in fact been done has been to create a huge pool of money-- hundreds of billions of dollars-- that politicians can use to give out to whomever they choose, to whomever they please for whatever reason they want. Money this country doesn't have. http://indebted.mtvu.com/
Many economists agree, that Government intervention prolonged the Great Depression. How long will this current downturn last with the amount of intervention we are seeing now?
Government intervention certainly did not prolong the Great Depression. No serious economist or historian who is not a complete libertarian propagandist can attempt to argue that point seriously.
Government intervention is needed and needed badly. We can debate what form that intervention takes, but let's be clear: the children in the private sector caused the problem. Let's allow the adults to have their hand in fixing it.
Rewriting history seems to be a favorite Republican pastime. Isn't that right, Lee?
The "current capitalist economy" is NOT exactly how it's been for two centuries, and for you to say so is preposterous, though the overwhelming disingenuosness of such a ridiculous line says much about your intentions here...
Despite the abject failure of free market fundamentalism (not capitalism per se) and deregulation, people like you still try to blame everything on Democrats and "government intervention."
You people are hilarious.
Obama would be wise to raise Pell grants! I expect he will try if there is any money left after the Paulson bailout of his buddies!!! I to have studies the Great Depression and believe we are fortunate to have an intelligent President-elect who will listen to many and make decisions on key issues that are supported by the current data. We are currently deep in debt due to the ignorance and cronyism of W Bush and his administration! Continuing to quote BS from the "right wing" talk show hosts does not help solve the problems we currently face!
Are you saying that this is perhaps an imaginary recession? That we are perhaps a nation of whiners?
You have been played right into Republican talking points. You need to do a lot more objective research. None of what you have written above is true or accurate. The economy at present is not what has been compared to the Great Depression. No one has done that except you and whomever is feeding you your information. The comparisons have been about what might happen in the future, not what has happened or what is happening now. And none of those comparisons have made any claim that what happened then can happen again because of regulations and safety checks that had been put in place since then. The comparisons are not in regards to such drastic changes in the GDP or unemployment around 25 percent. That's why you need to do more reading. The comparisons to the Great Depression are about the financial structures we've had over the past few decades and how those have been in the rapid process of being dismantled. Absolutely no one has claimed that we will replicate the exact dynamics of the Great Depression, just that we will have drastic destruction and change of our economic environments the likes of which have not been seen since the Great Depression. If you are in denial about that, then you are beyond help.
Amen to that! Give Obama a chance...it is about intelligence, critical/innovative thinking and a non-ideologue mindset. I intend to support Obama with an open mind and not judge him until he actually is President. All of us on the Left should hold Obama accountable on his promises for substantive change.
Yes, we elected him because he is smarter than we are... open minds are needed here.
@chaos4700
}}}}
Arctic ice formation is up from this time last year but is still substantially lower than in any previous year excluding 2007
{{{{{
Sure... Why not exclude ALL the data that doesn't support your theory?
Just like the religious fanatic who excludes all data that doesn't support their religion..
Michale.....
We forget that in order to make money (money coming in), we need to spend it (money flowing out). Without the natural flow, it tends to get stuck in one place, not doing anyone any good. Money is similar to the breath of the ocean or our own bodies. Holding on to our money, acting as stingy, we stop the flow and it doesn't go out or come back in. Obama is the bomb and he's shown us that, in many ways. We also need to give him a chance, for goddsakes; he's not even in the White House, yet.
Thank you.
Good Lord, is there anything that Bush did not s.c.re.w up? That man is leaving a legacy alright. He is going to make it impossible over the next 48 days, and counting. I have college aged children, and this isn't easy for them. I know that they are not only going to be paying off the debt for this bailout, but student loans as well. I knew that GW would fight things, and the GOP will oppose these much needed changes, and the Chambliss win was a downer, so all I can do right now, is take a deep breath and wait.
I support our 44th President's efforts 100%. He is the one I worked hard to help get elected, let's see what he can do. I am tired of hearing everyone in the media second guessing what he is doing. I know that we are anxious as we read the news daily, but the countdown has already begun.
Oh, and of course, the Democrats are COMPLETELY blameless in everything, right??
Let's can the bigotry and hypocrisy, eh??
Michale....
Jesus Michale, after 8 years of disastrous Bush administration policy, you are actually getting all peeved when someone makes that point emphatically without giving "equal time" to the supposed "equal" failures" of the Democrats?
And BTW, for you to use the terms "bigotry and hypocrisy" in this case renders those terms meaningless...how about we can the ridiculous hyperbole.
Let's see. I killed three people. You Jaywalked. WE ARE ALL CRIMINALS RIGHT????
Michale is spot on, but I'll take it a step further. The whole system is broke. With a few exceptions like Bernie Sanders, Ron Paul, and Dennis Kucinich (I'm sure there's more but I'm not that smart) everyone in DC is bought and paid for.
As Huey Long said way back in '35 or '36,
"when I got to Washington I found out that the only difference between the Republicans and the Democrats is that with the Republicans you get bled dry from the top down and with the democrats you get bled dry from the bottom up!"
"Same as it ever was, SAME AS IT EVER WAS!
People love the republicans. I could not believe that Chambliss won with double digits and 43% of blacks did not come out to vote. You bet! it's a downer.
On NPR I listened to next-President Obama's news conference to announce Bill Richardson as Commerce Secretary. What a team he is assembling! And hasn't he already held more press conferences in 3 weeks than GWB has held in 8 years?
The media will always second-guess because that's what they get paid to do. It's up to us to choose to pay attention to them or not. Some time ago I decided to no longer waste my time on FOX or Limbaugh or O'Reilly. They divide us and hold us back, with nothing forward-thinking to offer. I have no patience for any of those guys and I would question their patriotism. They waste America's time for their own silly self-promotion. I would hope that America would turn them off and devote our energies to the work at hand - rebuilding America and its leadership in the world.
Thanks for your post. Please stay tuned, stay engaged, and stay strong.
Donald Trump during an interview on Fox News, of all places, says Bush has been a disaster.
Everyone is going to have to contribute to the economis solutions. It will be by forced recession or voluntarily reducing costs and incomes. It's going to hurt for awhile. The media continues to focus on the problem and current situation (lame-duck president included) instead of generating support for intelligent people being selected by Obama. The change is the Obama leadership!
Let's not forget that we need jobs in order to earn money in order to spend money. Giving folks a government check aint no solution. We tried that through the IRS, didn't make a dime's worth of difference.
If he's not the change we need, it will come eventually. The only question will be - who gets hurt and how many?
Geez - how willfully ignorant can people be? The republicans lost because they failed astoundingly. Get over it. You screwed up big time,
How many people were hurt by the last eight years? Drink the koolaid and go already.
The change we needed was not the change in the administration. It was the change in the leader of the administration. Electing Obama already accomplished that. The problem was never the administration; it was the President.
The problem was never the administration??? I am overwhelmed trying to think of how to address that one.
Right, the problem never was the administration, it was the President. he didn't know how to lead. He let those in the administration lead him. Look at him not, where is he? AWOL. Non of his admin gives a damn about him now and so he's hiding away because he can't handle this mess. If he could, he'd hand it over to Obama today and run like hell That's what screw ups do. Politicsamerican is right and you should understand it.
Try understanding that the W administration was driven from the top down and tightly monitored and controlled!
Amen! I am so sick of people and news persons trying to figure this out. You are exactly right. As the ole saying goes "it ain't what you got, it's what you can do with it". I just wish they would stop trying to play Pres.-elect's hand. they couldn't figure it out before and they can't do it now. Just wait and see. All they said before "he can't win if he doesn't do this or that and they mis-read. He knows his plan and we need to give him time to go with it. My Lord, the man hasn't even been sworn in yet. But we can see that the one we have now is AWOL with all these problems. Thank you for what you said.
Obama's dad is irrelevant in the equation; If that train of thought were true, W would have stayed out of Iraq. As to his cabinet, I have grave concerns: Either his economic advisors have done a complete 180, or the foxes are in charge of the henhouse. His choice of Hilary Clinton for State makes about as much sense as appointing her Surgeon General. The logic is the same: She accompanied Bill to state functions - She visited the hospital.... I suppose time will tell. But, having witnessed every change of administration since JFK, I cannot remember ever feeling this apprehensive between election and inauguration.
I'm glad I am not you.
I don't know what would inspire ScooterLiddy's comment. I thought that was a terrific comment, Youngat80.
I think we all have selective memories. I can remember when the Inauguration date was changed from March to January. I cannot remember a time when the Inauguration of a new president was anticipated with so much expectancy of better times. Nor do I remember a time when voters were so willing to do whatever they can to make things better. There was never a time that I can recall, either from my memory or from my study of history, that a new president faced such serious problems. Perhaps there have been times when the out-going president was less cooperative; if there was, I can't cite any.
It is several weeks until the torch is passed. It's time to quit second-guessing every decision Barak Obama makes. It's time to let him get some much needed rest, mourn his grandmother's death and have some solitude for introspection and to recharge his spiritual batteries.
I also think it is urgent at this time to hold Bush and Cheney accountable for their deeds and misdeeds--even if that accountability requires impeachment.
If you think Obama's gonna hold Bush/Cheney accountable, dream on. Selecting Hillary as SecState was a very clear signal that past mistakes and idiocies have no significant consequences.
...and it's never too late to impeach Bush And Cheney. They must answer for what they have done. If they had illicit sex or molested a child the country would rightly be outraged. But since they merely bankrupted the country and had 4000 Americans and hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis killed. We should just give them a pass on this?? They must answer for what they, including the all but forgotten Wolfowitz, have done.
I think all of Obama's Cabinet Picks so far say a lot about his persona and how he will lead. Real leaders cannot be afraid to attract some pretty straight forward criticism once in awhile, and I have a feeling, our President Elect is going to get a lot of "interference" thrown at him. This is a good thing, as even at your job....there is always some people you HAVE to work with, even though you do not necessarily think the same way.
The appointments so far have not been in areas where "progressive" thinking is the most needed. I refer to Treasury and Nat'l Security.
I think Daschle's health care package really is progressive, such as it is, and just needs to be fulfilled properly.
the other areas where progressives, basically the pragmatic rather than the ideological wing of the democratic party, should be concentrated on is Agriculture, Energy, Interior, EPA, Education.
The labor department will be more ideological and one could expect a leftist ideologue like Hillary there. Unfortunately she is at State, the last place we needed a Saul Alinsky bomb throwing ideological lefty. Mistakes happen. BTW, anybody notice the huge republican margin of victory in Georgia? Anybody notice the tide turning the minute Hillary appeared? Obama will not easily get Bill and Hillary of the front page of Newsweek - and what a picture it will be - just weeks before the 2010 congressional elections. When you get elected to the presidency your own voice begins to sound so wise and it drowns out the noise of all those gnashing teeth. He'll hear 'em eventually.
Please tell me exactly how to invest my money, because surely and obviously you can precisely predict the future.
We have to look at "the big picture." Our days of tunnel vision need to cease. Our nation better wake up. With all our bail outs along with the 168 billion economic stimulus package, that btw did nothing for our economy it is hard to understand why our government can't see the need to bail us out of our dependence on foreign oil. The high cost of fuel this past year seriously damaged our economy and society. Meanwhile, while we are busy doing the Happy Dance around the lower prices at the pumps, OPEC is planning to cut production to drive prices back up to between 75-100. per barrel. Why don't we invest in America's Energy Independence. It would cost the equivalent of 60 cents per gallon to charge and drive. The electricity used to charge the car could conceivably be generated by solar or wind. Why not invest some of these millions in getting some of these projects set up? Create clean cheap energy, badly needed new green collar jobs and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. What more of a win-win situation could there be? Now there is talk of another stimulus pkg. Don't get me wrong, if you hand me a check I will take it. just think we are going about this all wrong. I just read a fascinating book by Jeff Wilson called The Manhattan Project of 2009 Energy Independence NOW.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
