Chris Good
Recently by Chris Good
Nov 12 2009, 12:07PM
Obama Applies The Patented Summit Approach To Jobs
It's the patented Obama leadership style: if you've got a problem that needs solving, hold a forum.
Obama today announced that he'll hold a summit on job creation at the White House, as the economy has begun to grow again but unemployment, which typically lags behind economic indicators like GDP, is still on the rise.
"[I]n in December, we'll be holding a forum at the White House on jobs and economic growth. We'll gather CEOs and small business owners, economists and financial experts, as well as representatives from labor unions and nonprofit groups, to talk about how we can work together to create jobs and get this economy moving again," Obama announced today during brief remarks before departing for Alaska en route to his week-long Asian trip.
Sound familiar? It is.
A couple weeks after taking office, the Obama formed his President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board, which includes economic experts, former administration officials, plus business and labor leaders. In May, it held its first quarterly meeting--something that could, presumably, look like what will happen at the jobs summit in December, but probably with more administration officials, breakout sessions, and fanfare.
Also in February, Obama held a Fiscal Responsibility Summit, pulling in lawmakers from both sides of the aisle to hold working groups. He invited lawmakers to the White House to discuss the stimulus, too, and he did the same for health care reform in March for a summit that included major industry players, then had those industry and labor leaders back to the White House in May to announce a deal in which everyone backed his broader goals for reform and pledged to cut costs.
Bringing multiple sides, both within government and without, "to the table" has been a buzzword of the Obama presidency, but we haven't seen much of it since those early talks with the major health care players, and December's meeting will mark a return to something we saw a lot of in Obama's early days.
Obama today announced that he'll hold a summit on job creation at the White House, as the economy has begun to grow again but unemployment, which typically lags behind economic indicators like GDP, is still on the rise.
"[I]n in December, we'll be holding a forum at the White House on jobs and economic growth. We'll gather CEOs and small business owners, economists and financial experts, as well as representatives from labor unions and nonprofit groups, to talk about how we can work together to create jobs and get this economy moving again," Obama announced today during brief remarks before departing for Alaska en route to his week-long Asian trip.
Sound familiar? It is.
A couple weeks after taking office, the Obama formed his President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board, which includes economic experts, former administration officials, plus business and labor leaders. In May, it held its first quarterly meeting--something that could, presumably, look like what will happen at the jobs summit in December, but probably with more administration officials, breakout sessions, and fanfare.
Also in February, Obama held a Fiscal Responsibility Summit, pulling in lawmakers from both sides of the aisle to hold working groups. He invited lawmakers to the White House to discuss the stimulus, too, and he did the same for health care reform in March for a summit that included major industry players, then had those industry and labor leaders back to the White House in May to announce a deal in which everyone backed his broader goals for reform and pledged to cut costs.
Bringing multiple sides, both within government and without, "to the table" has been a buzzword of the Obama presidency, but we haven't seen much of it since those early talks with the major health care players, and December's meeting will mark a return to something we saw a lot of in Obama's early days.
Nov 5 2009, 1:57PM
Swine Flu Politics: Health Reform Takes Hits Over Flu Vaccine
Criticism of the Obama administration's handling of swine flu vaccines has bled into another area of politics: the Democratic push for health care reform.
The administration has come under attack recently for reports that swine flu vaccines would be delivered to two of the most maligned classes of people in American politics--Guantanamo Bay detainees and Wall Street executives--before the rest of the country could get them.
A spokesman for the Guantanamo prison said earlier this week that vaccines should start arriving this month, and that the facility's medical staff had requested them. That statement was later contradicted by White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, who denied that any vaccines are on their way to Guantanamo at a his daily briefing with the White House press corps yesterday.
Oct 16 2009, 10:45AM
Report Card: Which Groups Use Social Media?
Being tech savvy is a prized credential among the nation's top political organizations. As new social media tools have popped up over the past several years, the myriad activist coalitions and trade associations have started to use them to stay in touch with members and generate buzz. If you're a political activist, chances are someone has tried to reach out to you online.
But which groups use the most online media tools? And which tools get used the most?
Sep 29 2009, 2:37PM
Aliens, the Public Option, and Us
As liberal Democrats will try (and are expected to fail) to add a public-option provision to Chairman Max Baucus's health care bill this week in the Senate Finance Committee, Media Matters for America points out that more Americans believe in UFOs than oppose the public option.
Sep 21 2009, 12:44PM
Are Americans More Laissez-Faire, After The Meltdown?
That's what a new Gallup survey suggests, finding that 45 percent of Americans, the highest reading in a decade, said there is too much "regulation of business and industry" when the polling agency asked them earlier this month, vs. 24 percent who say there's too little and 27 percent who say we have the right amount.
People also think the government is "trying to do too many things" these days, Gallup reports, as 57 percent, also the highest reading in a decade. Lest we take the latter nugget as a referendum on President Obama's domestic agenda and, in particular, health care reform--where polling suggests most people support the public option, the most aggressive proposal for government involvement currently on the table--let's remember that two things are prominently associated with government activity: the health care debate and financial bailouts. Those who oppose financial bailouts and those who oppose health reform have common ground on this question.
But it's the regulation numbers that are more surprising. After the financial meltdown, the government responded--beginning with the bailouts under the Bush administration and continuing under the current one--by interjecting itself into the economy in a massive way.
Gallup interprets the public's reaction as such:
The numbers suggest that people think the post-crisis government interjection was too massive, though it may not necessarily reflect a newfound preference for pro-business capitalism after the meltdown. It could mean people don't think businesses deserved the attention the government gave them when things got tough, like the takeover of GM.
But the way the question's asked, that rationalization is less likely than Gallup's take. The 45 percent don't necessarily think regulation is bad a priori, but they're uncomfortable with the government's current interjection into the economy, even in response to the meltdown.
People also think the government is "trying to do too many things" these days, Gallup reports, as 57 percent, also the highest reading in a decade. Lest we take the latter nugget as a referendum on President Obama's domestic agenda and, in particular, health care reform--where polling suggests most people support the public option, the most aggressive proposal for government involvement currently on the table--let's remember that two things are prominently associated with government activity: the health care debate and financial bailouts. Those who oppose financial bailouts and those who oppose health reform have common ground on this question.
But it's the regulation numbers that are more surprising. After the financial meltdown, the government responded--beginning with the bailouts under the Bush administration and continuing under the current one--by interjecting itself into the economy in a massive way.Gallup interprets the public's reaction as such:
These actions, and the recognition that some failed businesses, particularly those in the investment banking sector, have previously operated without much government oversight, could in theory have caused an increased appreciation for governmental regulation. That has not occurred.I wonder how conscious people are of overall business "regulation"--whether lots of respondents may have reacted based on what they've read about specific bailouts and the regulatory strings attached.
The numbers suggest that people think the post-crisis government interjection was too massive, though it may not necessarily reflect a newfound preference for pro-business capitalism after the meltdown. It could mean people don't think businesses deserved the attention the government gave them when things got tough, like the takeover of GM.
But the way the question's asked, that rationalization is less likely than Gallup's take. The 45 percent don't necessarily think regulation is bad a priori, but they're uncomfortable with the government's current interjection into the economy, even in response to the meltdown.
Sep 14 2009, 11:25AM
The Economy: Better or Worse Than a Year Ago?
A year ago tomorrow Lehman Brothers announced its collapse, marking the beginning of the end of the self-sustained U.S. financial system, as big banks crumbled one after the other and ultimately received $2 trillion in government money to keep existing. President Obama will use the occasion to deliver a speech on Wall Street this afternoon, outlining a retreat from the government's involvement with financial institutions. So how does the economy today, and Americans views of it, compare to a year ago? According to Gallup's charts, the economy is worse, but Americans are more optimistic that it's getting better:
Jul 20 2009, 1:41PM
The Politics Of The "New Normal"
Along with today's news that President Obama's poll numbers are slipping on health care and the economy, we also get a report from Gallup's Frank Newport on the "new normal"--a trend wherein Americans accept the dismal economic present as norm.
Jul 17 2009, 4:25PM
No Marijuana Legalization In California This Year
Marijuana has generated some headlines in California this week, with a report that a state legislature proposal to legalize and tax it could bring in $1.4 billion for the state, and a proposal from an LA councilwoman to tax medical marijuana. But while reformers have seen the profile of medical marijuana and overall pot legalization raised in 2009, they don't expect the California measure to pass this year.
May 8 2009, 1:12PM
Obama On Job Numbers: A Hand Up, Not A Hand Out
It strikes me that President Obama's response to today's rise in national unemployment (from 8.5 percent to 8.9 percent), in which he proposed to allow recipients of unemployment benefits to enter college, community college, and job-training, is a left-of-center version of the conservative/centrist line, "a hand up, not a hand out."
Apr 28 2009, 11:51AM
Congress, the Administration, and the Financial Collapse: Document Search
This was a staple of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee's activities during the Bush administration, but new committee Chairman Ed Towns (D-NY) has been going after documents putatively held by the Obama administration as part of his committee's investigation into the financial collapse. Today TPM reported that Towns and Ranking Member Darrell Issa (R-CA) sent letters to the Department of Justice and SEC, threatening them with subpoenas if they don't provide government reports on AIG. Earlier this month, Towns sought documents on Bank of America and Merrill Lynch from the Treasury and Federal Reserve. One wouldn't expect an adversarial start to the House Oversight panel's relationship with the new administration, but the language of today's reported letter sounds foreboding, and it appears that Towns means business--according to TPM's report, it read: "[F]ailure to comply with the Committee's request for the Cole reports raises the prospect that we will be forced to consider compulsory means to achieve compliance."
Apr 2 2009, 1:28PM
Public Grasps Basic Facts about Crisis
That's according to a news IQ poll released today by Pew. The researchers conducted something similar to (though more scientific than) a Jaywalking segment on Leno, asking citizens basic questions about economic-crisis-related news. And the public did alright: 83 percent knew that the government's financial bailouts are intended to get banks to lend more (as opposed to less) money; 71 percent knew that China holds the most U.S. debt of any foreign country; and 51 percent knew that Ford is the U.S. automaker not receiving government bailout money or loans.
Granted, those are pretty basic questions. Perhaps we shouldn't pat the American public on the back too eagerly for this.
Another interesting tidbit: for all the fuss over Timothy Geithner, his bank plans, and whether he's the man for the job, over fewer than six in 10 Americans know he's our Treasury secretary. See a chart of questions and the public's performance after the jump.
Granted, those are pretty basic questions. Perhaps we shouldn't pat the American public on the back too eagerly for this.
Another interesting tidbit: for all the fuss over Timothy Geithner, his bank plans, and whether he's the man for the job, over fewer than six in 10 Americans know he's our Treasury secretary. See a chart of questions and the public's performance after the jump.
Mar 24 2009, 2:09PM
Obama Relatively Free of AIG Worries
A poll from Gallup today suggested that, when it comes to AIG backlash, President Obama's hands are relatively clean. A majority of Americans were satisfied with Obama's handling of the AIG bonuses (54% to 39%), according to Gallup, while Treasury Sec. Timothy Geithner and Congress didn't fare as well: 28% were satisfied with Geithner's response (vs. 54% who were satisfied), and 26% said they were satisfied with Congress's response (vs. 65% who said they were dissatisfied).
Perhaps this has something to do with the ultimate decision never reaching Obama's desk. A House proposal took the hard line, looking to tax the bonuses into oblivion. The Senate didn't weigh in to the idea decisively before the poll was taken. And New York Attorney Andrew Cuomo, out front on the issue from the start, persuaded most of the executives to return the money, exempting Obama from action.
Perhaps this has something to do with the ultimate decision never reaching Obama's desk. A House proposal took the hard line, looking to tax the bonuses into oblivion. The Senate didn't weigh in to the idea decisively before the poll was taken. And New York Attorney Andrew Cuomo, out front on the issue from the start, persuaded most of the executives to return the money, exempting Obama from action.
Mar 23 2009, 10:39AM
Geithner lays out his plan in WSJ op-ed
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has laid out his plan to deal with bad bank assets in a Wall Street Journal op-ed this morning. It's been dubbed the It includes a so-called Public-Private Investment Program, and more information is available at the Treasury website 9see Conor's post below). One question--perhaps a tangential one--raised by this announcement is whether or not the public will move on from AIG outrage to digest and judge the plan, and whether it will quiet calls for Geithner to step down. This excerpt, from near the end of Geithner's op-ed, speaks to the political climate in which the Treasury secretary finds himself:
Moving forward, we as a nation must work together to strike the right balance between our need to promote the public trust and using taxpayer money prudently to strengthen the financial system, while also ensuring the trust of those market participants who we need to do their part to get credit flowing to working families and businesses -- large and small -- across this nation.
This requires those in the private sector to remember that government assistance is a privilege, not a right. When financial institutions come to us for direct financial assistance, our government has a responsibility to ensure these funds are deployed to expand the flow of credit to the economy, not to enrich executives or shareholders. These provisions need to be designed and applied in a way that does not deter the participation by the private sector in generally available programs to stabilize the housing markets, jump-start the credit markets, and rid banks of legacy assets.
Mar 20 2009, 9:03PM
Whispers of a card check compromise?
The folks at National Right to Work, of all people, are worried that, "[as] early as next Tuesday, corporate executives with the bulk retailer Costco,
the grocery store chain Whole Foods, Inc. and the coffee giant Starbucks appear
ready to endorse a so-called "compromise version" of Big Labor's top legislative
priority, the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill (H.R. 1409, S. 560)." I've been hearing rumblings of a compromise for a while now, but this is the first time specific companies have been identified. I am told that the compromise essentially opens the elections and arrays the thresholds for victory. For example: singing cards in public would require a 70% yes vote in order to form the union. Secret ballot elections would require 50% of the vote. And if the company was able to get the acquiescence of at least 30% of the workers, they'd have the right to organize the company in the future. An AFL-CIO spokesperson declined to comment, and representatives for the major business lobbies in town did not immediately respond to e-mails.My guess is that most of labor would be OK with this, and that that the companies who caved will suddenly get a lot of negotiating power. The Administration would like nothing more than to settle EFCA amicably, something that heretofore been impossible.
Mark Mix, president of National Right To Work Committee, said that "these huge companies are apparently willing to sell out hundreds of thousands of small ones under the guise of making some phony and misguided compromise with Big Labor."
Mark Mix, president of National Right To Work Committee, said that "these huge companies are apparently willing to sell out hundreds of thousands of small ones under the guise of making some phony and misguided compromise with Big Labor."
Mar 5 2009, 4:18PM
AFL-CIO: gov't should acquire controlling shares of banks (at least for a while)
While the federal government has taken great pains to avoid acquiring controlling shares of banks as it seeks to rescue them (and while the looming debate over "nationalization" has made bank rescues politically charged), the AFL-CIO is calling on the government to cross the threshold. In a resolution passed today by the federation's executive council at its annual meeting in Miami, the AFL-CIO formally urged the Obama administration to acquire controlling shares in order to force banks to reform their practices.
The resolution reads:
The resolution reads:
The AFL-CIO calls on the Obama administration to get fair value for any more public money put into the banks. In the case of distressed banks, this means the government will end up with a controlling share of common stock. The government should use that stake to force a cleanup of the banks' balance sheets. The result should be banks that can either be turned over to bondholders in exchange for bondholder concessions or sold back into the public markets. We believe the debate over nationalization is delaying the inevitable bank restructuring, which is something our economy cannot afford.
Feb 27 2009, 10:17AM
Citibank Tango Ends
The Treasury has concluded its financial/political dance with Citibank in a deal that will up the government's stake in the bank from 8 percent to 36. Today's deal will convert the government's preferred stock into common stock at a $3.25 per-share conversion price--much higher than the market value of common shares, which dropped 46 percent in pre-market trading and now sits at $1.71. Important to note is that the government is not making a bigger financial investment in the bank, but taxpayers will lose roughly $2 billion in dividends paid by preferred stock, according to CNN Money.
Aside from taxpayers losing money, the political bottom line is that the Obama administration has avoided acquiring a majority or controlling interest in the bank. Which is good for them. A barometer of reaction to the deal: the main headline on the Drudge Report right now makes no mention of "nationalization"--politically significant for a major administration bank deal--but it does say "Citi in the sewer."
Aside from taxpayers losing money, the political bottom line is that the Obama administration has avoided acquiring a majority or controlling interest in the bank. Which is good for them. A barometer of reaction to the deal: the main headline on the Drudge Report right now makes no mention of "nationalization"--politically significant for a major administration bank deal--but it does say "Citi in the sewer."
Feb 24 2009, 12:23PM
Chu Works to Get the Green Cash Flowing
After environmentalists and mainstream politicians alike succeeded in dedicating a good chunk of President Obama's stimulus package to green energy, Obama's new energy secretary has been working on ways to make that happen more efficiently. Last week, Energy Secretary Steven Chu (who holds a Nobel Prize in physics) announced a slew of reforms to how the department doles out money, and a department official says more are on the way. The goal: streamlining the process so stimulus dollars can get spent sooner.
Many have posed the economic crisis as an opportunity for green revolution, and at a roundtable discussion on energy yesterday at the Newseum, the economy/energy/environment nexus was on the tip of many tongues.
Many have posed the economic crisis as an opportunity for green revolution, and at a roundtable discussion on energy yesterday at the Newseum, the economy/energy/environment nexus was on the tip of many tongues.
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.