Newsweek - National News, World News, Health, Technology, Entertainment and more... | Newsweek.com
SPONSORED BY
  • No Love for Summers

    Daniel Stone | Nov 12, 2008 06:26 PM
    Not the best week for the candidacy of Larry Summers for Treasury secretary. As team Obama keeps tight lips about who's still being considered for the position, several left-leaning groups have begun to take advantage of the president-elect's idling time by pushing public opinion.

    A petition on The Nation's Web site calls upon Obama to say no to Summers, faulting the former TreasSec for his past support of deregulation of financial markets during the '90s, a collective decision at the time that, is now clear, was responsible for at least some of the lending domino effect leading to the pre-bailout wheezing of financial markets. He's also the target of several feminist groups who have brought up again comments Summers made as president of Harvard in 2005, suggesting women lacked the same aptitude in science and engineering as men.

    Still, there's a case to be made that Summers could be taking unfair blame for these past missteps, and appointing him to the post could actually make him a better, not worse, Treasury secretary under Obama. Why? Summers pursued market deregulation in the late '90s, but there's little doubt he feels the same way now. With the current destabilized global markets, it's Summers--perhaps more than anyone else except, maybe, Alan Greenspan--who recognizes the folly of deregulation, which was the policy, we shouldn't forget, of much of the Clinton administration. He also is one of the country's leading economic thinkers, and he has two Nobel laureates on two different sides of his blood line.

    His women-in-science comments can, in some ways, be another benefit for Summers; the episode showed, yes, his ability to put his foot in his mouth, but also a quality that's rare in Washington: he's not political. He doesn't speak to the cameras and doesn't try to get away with empty smooth talk. He speaks his mind--at times at his own peril--sometimes uninhibited, which is a quality Obama has said he'd value in any adviser, and would ensure the new president doesn't surround himself by an army of yes men. And dissent or vigorous debate over the flagship issue of the new administration (that being the economy, not women in science), could lead to more thoughtful and considered action by the administration.

    Summers would have a high reputation hurdle to overcome. But with the current whispering suggesting Summers would be a disaster in the role, he clearly would have much to prove. And nothing motivates quite like having a lot to gain...or much more to lose.
    More
  • Obama Takes a Broad Bipartisan Tack

    Richard Wolffe | Nov 12, 2008 12:42 PM

    Barack Obama has long said he wanted to pull together a bipartisan administration that followed the best policies, no matter whether they were Democratic or Republican ideas.

    That may sound like the usual rhetoric of a presidential candidate and president elect. After all, both President Clinton and President Bush appointed members of the other party to Cabinet positions. Clinton named William Cohen, a retired Republican senator from Maine, to be his Defense Secretary. Bush named Norman Mineta, a former Democratic congressman from California, to be his Transportation Secretary.

    By most outside measures, those Cabinet officials did not foreshadow any wider effort at bipartisan government. While both men were widely respected, their impact on White House politics was minimal. Cohen was widely seen as President Clinton’s effort to shore up his hawkish credentials; Mineta’s job was hardly influential in the broader Cabinet.

    Will Obama do anything different?

    According to John Podesta, the co-chair of the Obama transition, the answer is yes. While reporters were focused on lobbyist rules and speculation about new Cabinet names, Podesta dropped this nugget about the president-elect’s intentions during the first transition briefing.

    “He wants to see not just Democrats in office but he’s made a pledge to ensure that we reach out and have Republicans and independents, not just at a token level,” Podesta said. “There’s sort of been a tradition of having at least one person from the other party at the beginning of an administration in the Cabinet. His commitment is to deepen that and to look even just beyond the Cabinet, to try to bring people who agree with the direction that he wants to take the country and, regardless of party, to serve in the government.”

    This broadens the work and the scope of the transition enormously, opening up a swathe of jobs (by most counts, several hundred positions at the subcabinet level) to a far broader set of potential job- seekers. It also undercuts Republican accusations that the single transition job announced to date – Rahm Emanuel as White House chief of staff – represents some backtracking on Obama’s campaign pledge to move beyond partisan politics.

    Transition officials point to another announcement underscoring their bipartisan approach to forming a new government. While Obama himself will not meet with world leaders at the G20 meetings later this week, a prominent Republican and a Democrat will do so on his behalf: Jim Leach, the former GOP congressman from Iowa, and Madeleine Albright, the former Clinton secretary of state.

    More
  • Advertisement