Will Obama's First Term Really Just be a Hybrid of Clinton III and GW Bush III?

There is a strong chance that Lawrence Summers is going to be returned to the post of Secretary of the Treasury. If so, he's pulling a "Donald Rumsfeld" who served as Secretary of Defense twice -- the first stint under Gerald Ford and then of course under George W. Bush.

Others in the running for the post first held by Alexander Hamilton are New York Fed Chief and Summers protege, Timothy Geithner. Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker is on the list. Interestingly, many on the political left are making the case for former Bob Dole staffer and FDIC chief Sheila Bair, who has in the eyes of many performed brilliantly in organizing an FDIC response on the housing crisis. Laura D'Andrea Tyson is not much discussed in the news but has become close to Obama and would be a solid choice. New Jersey Governor and former Goldman Sachs executive Jon Corzine is also on the list and is the enthusiastic preference of the labor community.

I think that there are more and even better choices. Among the frontrunners, I'd prefer Geithner, Tyson, or Corzine.

Tim Geithner who is the smartest, most unassuming financial markets technician among the lot. Geithner is probably the closest thing we have to a modern version of John Maynard Keynes. I also like Laura Tyson who I think could be useful in launching a campaign of "Tysonomics" which values some elements of industrial policy in a national economic plan vs the manic neoliberalism of "Rubinomics." Finally, Corzine -- who understands better than the other contenders that America's social contract at home must be dramatically changed -- would be a fantastic choice. His only blemish is that he worked for Goldman Sachs -- though I think Corzine thinks that was the low point of his working career and wishes he hadn't spent much time there.

Rumor has it (unconfirmed) that Summers recently had dinner with Gloria Steinem as part of an image repair strategy. Summers has also been reaching out to many economists on the left who generally opposed the manic neoliberal vector that former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin and Summers had put the nation on during Bill Clinton's presidency.

I have been surprised about the quick rehabilitation of Summers in Obama Land -- particularly given Obama's promises to the labor community and his strident position during the campaign against the kind of trade deals that Summers and Rubin promoted.

If he is appointed over Geithner, Tyson, and others -- we need to quickly get a sense of whether or not the economic views of Summers have changed. Can he embrace a smarter version of globalization than he helped create? Can he help promote an alternative to the winner takes all capitalism that Summers helped to reify and which made people like Robert Rubin mega-wealthy? Can he embrace a genuine re-write of the American social contract that pushes forward the rights and position of labor? Can he abandon the fiscally conservative ideology of the Brookings Institution's Hamilton Project that he and Rubin helped hatch?

We need to know the answers to these questions. I find it strange that Obama is seriously considering someone whose previous work and profile is so at odds with the goals Obama has proffered in his campaign. If Summers is appointed, we have to hope that he is not the Summers we knew eight years ago.

Larry will have to prove to us that he is different. He will have to prove to us that he is not the harbinger of Clinton Term III.

I spoke to one of the world's leading, successful financiers Tuesday night who told me he prefers Summers to Geithner at Treasury. But I countered that Larry Summers will probably continue his work as one of Bob Rubin's chief acolytes -- and Rubinism is one of the chief reasons that this economy has been trampling the Middle Class and labor in favor of the super-wealthy financial elite. This financier told me that Rubin and Summers are quite different in fact but few knew of the tensions between them. I told him I'd love to hear more about that as it could help me appreciate Summers more than I do now.

I will keep an open mind, but we are beginning to see trends that if Obama does bring back Summers -- and possibly keeps Gates at Defense -- that he is not ready to make the first term of an Obama administration about the new great leaps forward we need. He may be crafting a hybrid of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush holdovers.

Indeed, there is a chance that Obama I could turn out to be GW Bush III & Clinton III.

-- Steve Clemons publishes the popular political blog, The Washington Note

Comments

[drbob601]

Timothy Geithner as Treasury Secretary? Are you serious? Geithner recently appointed Michael Alix (the former chief risk officer at Bear Stearns) to the position of senior vice president in the bank supervision group of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. "In his new job at the central bank, Alix will help oversee the financial safety and soundness of banks, which are inspected by Federal Reserve examiners." Anyone remember Bear Stearns? The investment bank that practically collapsed back in March (until the Fed orchestrated its sale to JPM -- with a $29 billion federal backstop from the Fed acting as central bank).
Talk about bad judgment...

I've also read that Geithner was the clown who recommended that Lehman be allowed to fail. Another brilliant decision, Mike...that worked out really well.

Geithner is clueless, and my guess is that he'd be a disaster as Sec of the treasury.

[Morcat]

You can't see a trend until something happens, and you need six data points at least in order to develop an opinion. Kindly don't demonize Obama before he can even make the decisions. If you don't like a candidate for appointed office -- say so -- don't make it sound as though everything is already a failure.

[XME]

Wow, there certainly are a lot of people who supported Obama ALREADY expressing lots of doubts and putting great expectations on him!

I'm not sure what kind of extreme "change" you expected of him, but some of us are a bit more realistic and simply expect him to correct some of the failed paths we headed down over the past eight years. He is, after all, only human and can only accomplish so much in a few years. He needs to pick some major issues that need to be addressed and focus on them, not overreach and try to accomplish everything all at once. That approach often leads to failure, and I trust that Obama knows this better than some of his supporters seem to understand.

[heyjoe]

The reports surfacing about who President Elect Obama is offering jobs to is troubling to me. If his cabinet is not as DIVERSE as the country he has been asked to lead, I simply will not support or vote of Obama again, full stop.
This is rediculous that all these people are cacasion males. That is utter madness.

[sophiep]

Summers has been writing a regular column in the Financial Times (www.ft.com). He wrote 2 columns in the spring with his latest thinking on free trade and globalization policies (he doesn't shrink from admitting that the 90s policies were flawed and giving credit to Robert Reich):

"To benefit the interests of US citizens and command broad political support, US international economic policy will need to focus on the issues in which the largest number of Americans have the greatest stake. A decoupling of the interests of businesses and nations may be inevitable; a decoupling of international economic policies and the interests of American workers is not."

The economic policies we face are sufficiently complex that we need experienced people of superior intellect. Summers isn't stuck in the Clinton era from a policy standpoint -- and he's a rare person in political life who cares more about the rightness of ideas and policies than agendas and ideologies.

[ShamusDaedal]

Thomas Jefferson said that the collective wisdom of the people is far wiser than that of the few. The election of Barack Obama is the result of a far larger percentage of the eligible voters than in most of those past. He was able to get out a huge vote, and a wise choice resulted.

If we don"t vote we get far more than any decent population deserves: George W. Bush and the criminally devious and secretive Dick Cheney. That"s what happens when we get apathetic. Those bums nearly ruined this nation and masses of people just had to see what a disaster they"ve brought. Now they have eclipsed even Reagan as the most disastrous and incompetent administration in history!

Pray that we once again have a rational energy policy (a la Carter"s, undone summarily by the dunce) and a cooperative foreign policy and a New Deal to repair our sadly neglected infrastructure and a massive push to make education such a high priority that we no longer trail most of the rest of the world. (Would well-informed people have voted for a man like "W"?)

Never fail to vote again! See what can happen?

[obidennvr]

The "Collective Wisdom" got rid of Carter and Clinton and gave us Regan and Bush.

[TRIATHLON]

OBAMA FROM MESSIAH TO HYBRED ONE TERM WONDER

Same (18th) Century Government with minor changes (6) in the Senate out (100) that a (6%) Change, and what (22) out of what less than a percent or two percent? Even (R-CA) Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, uttered a profound and true statement that in fact there is more CHANGE, in the Communist system of government than in The United States of America. And, some how were too expect a change to what of course pick your poison change, GW Bush III & Clinton III, back to the future system of economics. How many more wall paper treasury note (IOU's) will China need to paper their out houses and Charmin Tissue American Dollars to wipe their backsides before they say we want Alaska, Washigton State, Oregon, California, and Hawaii, as assets to back your (IOU's)?

OBAMA IS LOOKING LIKE A ONE TERM WONDER!

[jotunloki]

And you're looking and sounding like an ancephalic.

[ElBruce]

That cover picture made me throw up in my mouth. Why should we expect the same people who championed the policies that caused the market to melt down to have any ability to turn around and "save" it? It's like we've still got a national case of Stockholm Syndrome.

I want Krugman.

[jotunloki]

H*LL yes!

[AmericanSon]

I would hope that President Obama would listen to Paul Krugman, David Cay Johnston, Ravi Batra and HuffPost contributor Hale "Bonddad" Stewart.

[Javani]

Corzine is a good fit for Obama.

Goldman Sachs history and therefore big promoter of carbon cap and trade.

As for "labor" supporting him, I don't doubt the writer, but don't know what Corzine's history is with labor.

Obama's history is not with labor but traders and carbon market thinkers so Corzine is a good fit.

[UpstateNY]

He is about excellence and after 8 years of mediocrity, I'm ready for excellence.

So, I'll just let Barack and his staff pick who they believe are the best people for the jobs. They've done a great job up till now so we just have to trust them for now.

[gabbinjane]

After watching him flip-flop on almost every issue (except infanticide), and demonstrate poitical cowardice (120+ "present" votes), as well as his tendencies to support corruption (Rezco, ACORN, et al.) and naivete' about foreign affairs (Kerry as Sec. State?? Richardson?? PLEASE), I expect Jimmy Carter II. I do hope I'm wrong. HRC in 2012!!!

[jeg]

Well, you've certainly demonstrated the ability to be wrong with your post.....

[jotunloki]

The chances of anyone successfully winning the Democratic nomination against a sitting President are almost non-existent you Repug troll.

[Novista]

Ah, another example of progressive exceptionalism. Not that I agree with gabbinjane but! don't you lot ever get tired of name calling? You've had eight years of it and should have learned that negativism no long works. Just ask Karl Rove.

[CastleBravo1]

Hillary flushed her career, ability, and legacy down the toilet when she decided to outflank Adolf Hitler on the right. End of story.

[lafrance]

I doubt Obama will be like either one. Obama is not about ideology but, more of a pragmatist. I know he avoids the labels of liberal, centrist, ect.
It's about governing and getting things done. He picks from every side and melds them.
If you listen to his speeches he says it is not about bigger government or smaller. it's about efficient government. Government that works and has solutions.
He is thinking outside the box of old arguments of left and right.
I have listened carefully to his speeches and he is very consistent. He doesn't demonize the right, Is not about being far left or center. He is always talking about what works.
He's from chicago! the city that works.
That is what he is into and won't bog down on being centrist or any other ideology. I knew that about him when I voted for him in 04 to be my senator.

[obidennvr]

"He picks from every side and melds them"- When exactly has he done any of that?
"He is thinking outside the box of old arguments of left and right." - What does that mean?

[Grunty1]

You are already condemning a president-elect (for two days!) based on RUMORS??

[jeg]

Naturally. There's nothing else to talk about, so why not make stuff up to pass the time?

[Viper]

I once voted straight Repug until 1992... People can change.. and Clinton 3 would be an improvement of major proportion over the last 8 years.

Regards

[knowBuddhaU]

Of these candidates, who are the Perkinsian Economic Hit Men? Where do "black economic ops," and black psy ops (the use of weapons-grade propaganda more than automatic weapons, for example), fit in your analyses?

NAOMI KLEIN: "And so, the Chicago Boys were born. And it was considered a success... [H]undreds and hundreds of Latin American students, on full scholarships, came to the University of Chicago in the 1950s and "60s to study here to try to engage in what Juan Gabriel Valdes, Chile's foreign minister after the dictatorship finally ended, described as a project of deliberate ideological transfer, taking these extreme-right ideas, that were seen as marginal even in the United States, and transplanting them to Latin America. That was his phrase--that is his phrase." http://www.democracynow.org/2008/10/6/naomi_klein

"Your reasoning is perfectly logical but totally insane," Lutzenburger told Summers. "Your thoughts [provide] a concrete example of the unbelievable alienation, reductionist thinking, social ruthlessness and the arrogant ignorance of many conventional 'economists' concerning the nature of the world we live in... If the World Bank keeps you as vice president it will lose all credibility."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-blumenthal/lawrence-summers-africa-i_b_141706.html

So who are these 'economists,' and their brethren wolves in academic clothing? And who's giving them their marching orders?