« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Obama's Economic Policy
As an Obama supporter, and despite his sweeping victories in recent weeks, I have been getting pretty concerned about Clinton's success in framing the race as one of style versus substance, rhetoric versus detailed policy plans. I probably spend too much time reading the comment sections of articles on the NYT, ABC, MSNBC and Fox news websites. Undecided voters and those leaning towards Clinton are swallowing the characterization, and I don't think Obama has done enough to counter this solidifying image.
Obama is winning so comprehensively at the moment - as exit polls suggest - because people seem to care more about "change" than "experience" and "unity" versus "divisiveness". Clinton's commanding leads in Ohio and Texas may suggest that voters in these states may not share the preferences of Potomac primary voters.
All of this to say, that I was pleased to hear Obama made a major economic policy speech in Wisconsin today, and I was pleased at the relative beef it contained. I am not one of those people who thinks a candidate must have minutely detailed policies laid out on the campaign trail, let alone that such minute detail should be articulated in a campaign speech. I think this speech offered just enough for voters to digest, in order to get a sense of the kind of policies Obama espouses, and the kind of priorities he thinks a president should have in 2008.
Read it here:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samgrahamfelsen/Cmzm
Comments (22)
Thanks for the link to the speech. I agree that Obama has not done enough to address the "substance" attack, which has been newly elevated by both Clinton and McCain. I think that this is Clinton's last, best chance to pin a significant negative on Obama, so I'm glad to see the speech, which seems like the beginning of a response from him. I've been consistently surprised by how well Obama has parried her blows thus far, so I'm optimistic that he'll be able to do it again.
February 13, 2008 7:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another thing that I would like to see Obama do is take the offensive against Clinton's policy. He's basically ceded her policy expertise so far. On the rare occasions when he's gone after her policy, it's been a reaction. For instance, he only attacked the enforceability of health care mandates after Clinton and Edwards attacked his plan for not being universal.
February 13, 2008 7:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, there is a problem with universal health care not being exactly UNIVERSAL, you see.
Maybe we can all just HOPE it will work.
February 13, 2008 10:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
After reading this comment, I'm sure there is one question that permeates the minds of many like me:
"Obama has an economic policy?"
Does it go something like this:
"A Stronger Economy & Good Jobs" plan will:
* Accelerate Our Investment in Clean Energy: The crisis of global warming and the high cost of energy require us to invest in a new infrastructure as the foundation for a new clean energy economy. Building this infrastructure will create jobs and spark economic activity, while also investing in our nation's long-term prosperity.
* Strengthen the Safety Net for Workers Struggling to Find Jobs: Our nation's unemployment safety net is badly outdated, leaving workers – especially low-wage or part time workers – unprepared for hard times. Edwards calls on Congress to set aside resources now to help states cover additional workers so if unemployment rises, workers won't have to wait.
* Help States Avoid Property Tax Increases and Cuts in Critical Programs like Medicaid: Most states are constitutionally required to balance their budgets, which forces them to raise taxes and cut vital programs like Medicaid during recessions. Edwards will increase the federal contribution to Medicaid and provide additional aid to states, helping them avoid cuts to education, health care and other basic services and avoid increases in property and other taxes that disproportionately impact working families and seniors on fixed incomes.
* Tackle the Housing Crisis: Edwards believes that Congress must do much more to tackle the mortgage crisis, including creating a Home Rescue Fund to help families avoid foreclosure, giving families the right to rewrite the terms of their primary mortgages in bankruptcy; creating a new federal regulator for financial services products; and passing a strong national law against predatory lending to prevent future crises.
* Monitor the Economy Closely and Take Additional Steps if Necessary: If the economy falls into a recession and unemployment rises, as many fear, then additional steps will be necessary. An appropriate package of approximately $100 billion could include additional state relief, additional spending on a new energy infrastructure, accelerating investments in schools, roads, and bridges and temporary tax cuts targeted to the low-income and middle-class families who are most likely to spend money in their pockets.
For more information, please see the "A Stronger Economy & Good Jobs" policy paper
....by Braak Oh!bama?
Not exactly.
February 13, 2008 10:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton (and Obama) is only proposing what I have been pushing for a few years. Neither candidate has a lock on wisdom, or the perfect plan.
What matters is 1) getting elected, and 2) getting legislation passed. Clinton does not have a lock on that, either.
February 14, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
workerbee, your consistent sarcasm would be more appreciated if you employed it with a modicum of wit.
February 13, 2008 11:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
One would need to possess more than a modicum of wits to appreciate my wit, to whit.
February 14, 2008 7:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
workerbee, what exactly is wrong with the Democratic candidates agreeing on something as fundamentally important as economic policy?
And if you were an Edwards supporter and are suggesting Obama poached Edwards' policies, why are you complaining? Would you not like his policies to survive his candidacy? Did Edwards not request that the remaining candidates carry on his message?
In the end, the remaining candidates are both Senators whose policies are developed by others - mainly Democratic policy advisers - albeit with an understanding of where the candidates' stand on the issues generally. What a surprise that Democratic policy advisers might agree on policy.
Personally I am relieved that Clinton's policies do not differ too much from Obama's. We all want to be satisfied with the ultimate nominee on the issues.
February 14, 2008 1:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, MsJane.
Sure I'm happy Obama hijacked Edwards policies. It does make me question his integrity when he doesn't acknowledge that, however.
February 14, 2008 7:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama just doesn't steal Edwards policies he has been stealing Hillary's. Obama is such a fake it is unbeilavable. He claims that there is no way Hillary can gain more delegates...what a LIE HIllary is ahead with MI and FL, but obama doesn't want them to count, they will, and with them she leads more than 100. without them he leads 55.
http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/results/delegates/index.html
Just a few more lies from obama.
Obama lies on his healthcare plan
http://facts.hillaryhub.com/archive/?id=5908
obama lies on rezko and Exelon
http://facts.hillaryhub.com/archive/?id=5931
obama lies on bipartisanship
http://facts.hillaryhub.com/archive/?id=5897
obama lies again in WA.
http://facts.hillaryhub.com/archive/?id=5845
obama lies on Hillary’s trade record and words
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=5958
Obama steals Hillary’s economic policy
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=5954
February 14, 2008 8:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
I suspect that even though Obama adopts Edwards' policies in his speeches, he may not pursue them if elected. Obama's Chicago School economic advisers are not likely to advise him to push for as much intervention in the market economy as Edwards proposes. They are basically monetary theorists, not Keynsians. Personally, I would like to see more attention given to building infrastructure along the border.
February 14, 2008 8:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Aren't we all Keynesians now?
Anyway, there's a post on this topic over at politico.com Claiming Theft that deals with this. Here's a cut-and-paste of the quote from the Obama campaign:
“If the Clinton campaign ever bothered to check their facts before attacking, they’d know that Barack Obama’s comprehensive energy plan to create millions of new jobs was introduced a month before Senator Clinton’s, and that his infrastructure plan invests billions more than hers does to rebuild our roads, bridges, and schools. But the real problem in Washington is not a lack of good ideas, it’s the failure to come together and solve our problems because politicians are too busy scoring cheap political points just like this one."
Apparently, it's not only the politicians who are too busy on that score.
Me, I was just so impressed that Team Obama even knows how to spell 'infrastructure' correctly. I'll try to dig up something where they've spelled 'Keynesian' correctly as well, and then maybe we can put this lame discussion to rest.
February 14, 2008 9:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe you should offer a free copy of your spell checker. Spelling gotchas are bush in the blogosphere. Are we all Keynesians? Of course not. If we were, we would use fiscal policy to smooth business cycles instead of monetary policy, something you are not likely to see Mr. Obama or anyone else suggest.
February 14, 2008 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't Bush's tax rebate policy totally Keynesian?
Like so much else that's already such a part of our tax, credit and budget policy landscape that we don't even think to call it Keynesian anymore?
Yawn, sorry, this is boring. Let's get back to who ripped off who's economic policies. Or not. That's pretty boring, too.
We Are All Keynesians Now
February 14, 2008 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Billy, MsJane, I didn't even bother to offer a serious reply to workerbee because his/her posts are brainless. The Edwards and Obama plans are quite different. The clean energy investment plank is the only part that they share.
February 14, 2008 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
I guess my bar for brains is lower than yours. I'm not sure any specific plank is the point. Whether Obama can incorporate Edwards' populist agenda into his own, and whether he can enact it if he does is, to me at least, a more interesting question. Chino notes that the Obama campaign's argument is that he can bring politicians from both sides together to solve problems -- whatever those problems happen to be -- and Clinton can't. The Clinton argument is that Obama will find that much harder to do than he thinks. Indeed, I suspect their real point is that he knows it will be harder to do than he is letting on. Let me give you a personal example. I may vote for Obama for President, but I won't vote for a Congressman who supports raising the capital gains tax.
February 14, 2008 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think claiming that Obama hijacked Edwards' plan without offering a shred of analysis and without seeming to have even read the plans (or, if having read, to have comprehended), is well within the bounds of a brainless post. But I think it's the juvenile snipes, e.g. "Braak Oh!bama?", that get to me for some reason
To your point, I don't think that Obama has ever claimed that it will be easy to bring politicians with different objectives together, and by "unity", he does not mean "universal"--I don't expect Sen. Inhofe to vote for a single Obama bill. But if you start from the perspective that it's us against them, you're going to be fighting them for every inch of ground. That may work when you've got the majority, but it doesn't help you to maintain the majority at midterms, and it leads to a stalemate when you lose the majority, as G.W. has finally discovered.
If on the other hand, you start from the perspective that we're in this together, people on the other side of the aisle will respond, at least some of them will. There will of course be battles and areas of major disagreement, but the goal is to at least increase the level of good will and diminish the bitterness that characterizes the current government. It's not going to be all kumbaya, but it's been better than this before, and it can be better again.
February 14, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
The power of the hivemind I've succumbed to compels me to labor to bring errant workerbees to the Truth ...
Obama Campaign Defends Its Tax Cut Plan
Fave comment in response to a charge that Obama's plan was copied from an earlier Edwards proposal:
By the way, looks like Obama's gonna raise the capital gains tax to pay for lower and middle class tax relief. Sorry.
February 14, 2008 11:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
To some we will never get single payer because other nation have that plan already...just go figure
February 14, 2008 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Off topic, but hello from a fellow Buffy fan. Don't you just love Jo Chen's artwork?
February 14, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
CommonDreamer, yes I love Chen's art work. In fact, my local comic book store in Sydney has run out of Season 8 #9, etc. in Chen's covers, and I refuse to buy the alternate covers, so I must wait until they sell out of the alternate and order more original covers, if they do. I may have to shop around.
Back to topic...
February 14, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton supporters, esp. Taylor Marsh has been complaining that Obama has plagiarized Clinton's economic stimulus plan. I confess ignorance on this point? Any opinions on this "plagiarism" issue?
February 14, 2008 4:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment