From The Huffington Post:
Mr. President, I've got a big problem with this, and ever since the buck started stopping there in the Oval Office with Harry Truman, my beef is ultimately with you. Christina Romer is the second high-level official to leave your administration, and this is the second time it's been cast as "unsurprising." We have a saying here: that dog won't hunt.
President Obama, as vehemently as I supported you in the election, and as intellectually sound as I believe most of your advisers are, I think it's safe to say that there are cracks in the armor. You have surrounded yourself with some of the most brilliant people in this country, but that doesn't always translate to positive results. Quite frankly, brilliant people CAN, in fact, give terrible advice. My problem with what keeps happening is that all the WRONG people are leaving because they're frustrated. And who the hell could blame them? This article outlines how Larry Summers simply ignored some of the work Ms. Romer did in her economic analysis, forecast, etc., and then we're supposed to turn around and act surprised when some of the promises that were made don't come to fruition? I don't think so. In a parallel universe, I would be completely comfortable sitting here talking about how two economic advisers had left your administration if those two advisers were not Orzag and Romer. Quite frankly Mr. President, there are two who should be gone. Their names? Summers and Geithner. That's right, Geithner. Your closest economic advisor and your Secretary of the Treasury should be the two taking the fall. They are the two with the direct shot to your ear, and that's fine; the problem isn't with your ear. Those two are simply incapable of taking the PULSE of the country. Both come from Wall Street. Geithner is the definition of fox guarding the hen house; and anyone who's scared of Elizabeth Warren (who should be Treasury Secretary) heading the Consumer Protection Agency is ludicrous in my book. Larry Summers is still trying to run things like he ran Harvard; and there's a reason (or many) why he's not at Harvard anymore. They operate as if they exist in an administrative vacuum. And I don't know if you know it yet or not, but it's costing you. You are weakening your standing, and even your right to relay an economic message, by keeping the wrong people around.
The similarity between you and Ronald Reagan at this point in his presidency is striking. The two polling positions are almost identical. The fall from the top is almost identical. But one thing is left to be seen: where it goes from here. Your current approval rating is about 41%, right where Reagan was; but he WON A SECOND TERM! Why? Because the economy turned upward. There is an unmistakable, incontrovertible correlation between economic performance and presidential approval rating. Now, maybe you won't run again. Maybe you'll shake things up with a new Vice Presidential candidate. Maybe the economy will brighten over the next few months. Maybe, maybe, maybe. Let me give you a sure thing: you do not need to make it any more difficult an electoral environment than it's already going to be. Decisions (and advisers) like these, I believe, are truly opening you up to a Democratic Primary challenger. And we all see how well that worked out for both Carter and Kennedy. Letting the likes of Christina Romer go is not the direction you need to take. Sir, Summers and Geithner are the two bad apples in the room with you; and if you're not careful, voters are just going to throw out the whole bunch.
You included.
No comments:
Post a Comment