Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
GEITHNER AND SUMMERS SEE THE KNIVES.
There's a lot going on in this Washington Post article detailing the influence of Timothy Geithner and Larry Summers. Take this paragraph, for instance:
Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner and National Economic Council Chair Lawrence H. Summers pushed for weeks for a strict cap on the nation's debt. And while other advisers argued that the administration needed a more flexible spending plan, they could not deter the president from ultimately agreeing with the views promoted by the partnership of Geithner and Summers.
Elsewhere in the article:
Obama's decision to make Summers and Geithner the key players in such a wide-ranging agenda has left some within the government concerned that they will be unable to handle so many complex issues at once. Geithner already was widely criticized on Wall Street for being too vague when he announced the financial rescue package last month.
"Some," are concerned about that, huh?
The winners of a policy debate rarely try and make their own position seem lonesome. This was leaked by the losers. It's an attempt to ensure that if the financial plans fall apart, that Geithner and Summers are understood to have had full authorship. And it comes after a similar article in The New York Times that pinned the provisions of the TARP plan on Geithner. These are some serious leaks. These guys have made some serious enemies.
COMMENTS (13)
"These guys have made some serious enemies."
Good. If Obama fails to revive the economy, it will be because of his appointment of a blindly smug asshole and his toady to the most important positions in his administration.
Posted by: brewmn | March 2, 2009 12:39 PM
How long can we afford to wait before Volcker is made the go-to guy? Geithner and Summers make me very queasy.
Posted by: William Krause | March 2, 2009 12:50 PM
Or maybe instead of a Beltway CYA explanation, the leakers could be sincerely worried about the grave damage being done to America's & the world's economies by two Wall Street insiders and their horribly inexperienced boss.
We have the Sumners/Cohen/Krugman argument today about whether quantitive easing by the Fed can do any good, i.e., whether a promise to inflate will be credible. You do understand that a hard limit on the national debt, an intermediate expectation of tightening, spending restraint, & tax increases will an immediate effect on consumption & investment?
Worst depression President ever.
Posted by: bob mcmanus | March 2, 2009 12:57 PM
The structural problem is that Geithner and Summers reflect pretty closely the ideological center of the players in any coalition needed to get anything requiring legislation done, especially in the Senate, but also in the media.
It isn't like there are thirty Bernie Sanders in the Senate, and The Nation has its own financial-news channel on basic cable.
Posted by: Davis X. Machina | March 2, 2009 1:07 PM
Meet the new Henry Paulson, same as the old Henry Paulson.
Posted by: Eisbär | March 2, 2009 1:10 PM
"before Volcker is made the go-to guy?"
I wish the pronlem were just Geithner & Sumners, but Obama has been a tax-cutting, budget-balancing deficit-hawk Pay-Go kinda guy as long as I have been aware of him. He's doin' the Keynesian thing, but I don't think he's enjoying it.
I also think Obama is just too young & too accomodatin', and is intimidated and overawed by the billionaire Masters of the Universe in ways HRC would not have been.
Posted by: bob mcmanus | March 2, 2009 1:11 PM
People heard and rejected arguments like yours in the primary and they heard and rejected them in the general. You lost Bob; get over it. I see nothing at all new in your comments - nor do I see any recognition at all of the things that Obama has already done. I do see some vague righteous positioning with nothing specific as an alternative.
Posted by: Marc | March 2, 2009 1:25 PM
"The winners of a policy debate rarely try and make their own position seem lonesome."
Pet-peeve: "try to" not "try and." The latter is a common verbal tic, but it makes no sense and is even worse in print.
Posted by: Bill | March 2, 2009 1:44 PM
with nothing specific as an alternative.
I have been complaining about Obama's middle-class tax cut for about a year, including on this blog.
The alternatives aren't hard to find; there was plenty of discussion of the inadequacy of Obama's stimulus plan. You could also go back to FDR's 1st 100 days or FDR's first term for a contrast. Bank holiday/nationalization vs bank bailout?
Good things Obamas has done? Like the puppies? Exactly what is going to compensate for sending the world into a depression and handing the White House to a fascist in 2012?
Posted by: bob mcmanus | March 2, 2009 1:58 PM
jesus fucking christ bob mcmanus. I was sort of with you until you brought up Hillary Clinton. The idea that Clinton would have been more progressive than Obama is laughable.
anyway, here's hoping Summers and Geithner know what they're doing. Because Obama has invested his presidency in these guys. *crosses fingers*
Posted by: raft | March 2, 2009 2:07 PM
I'm no expert, and I'm an Obama fan, but Summers and Geithner make me very nervous. I don't think they have the courage to do what needs to be done, which imho is temporary nationalization of some banks - they are too tied to the status quo on Wall St. to be able to really see what is needed. I think Obama should start looking for replacements.
Posted by: Kathy Regan | March 2, 2009 2:21 PM
"I'm an Obama fan, but Summers and Geithner make me very nervous."
Me too.
Posted by: piglet | March 2, 2009 3:13 PM
Re: Summers - how about the mess he left Harvard in? Urging the endowment to leverage up, now they're facing margin calls and borrowing to meet operating expenses. And now he's running the national economy?
Posted by: Doug Henwood | March 3, 2009 4:42 PM