|
Edited on Wed Mar-25-09 03:26 PM by karynnj
which have always been insightful, intelligent and wonderfully written. I really enjoyed the thread where the two of us along with others took up Tay Tay's request and tried to gather articles and information from the Congressional record to try to understand how the financial mess occurred. It would be an understatement to say that no one emerged a hero.
It also was likely that, for the most part, the problems did not come from malfeasance. I would blame ideology and too many people relying on a small interconnected group of advisers. Ideology drove the three Gramm amendments - all coming from his honest belief in the free market unharnessed from regulation. The Democrats faced these amendments in huge bills - and, by and large, trusted Rubin, Summers, et al that these removed antiquated regulations. I hope that Obama and the various Senators have learned from this the need to pull in more diverse experts. (I don't think they learned not to put very large, complicated, controversial things in as amendments to the must pass budget - we are all hoping Obama gets health care, education, and cap and trade (the least likely) in his. Here the 60 versus 50 votes drives this - this is an unintended consequence of the requirement that 60 is needed to waive the budget.)
I wish you well in all the things that you try to do and hope that things work out better than expected for your family. I can understand that there is a huge difference between blogging to help get a Democratic President and Congress and the situation now. I would like to think that the sum of the liberal blogosphere helped get us to this point. It is ambiguous as to what the blogosphere can do now.
Obama can command TV any time he wants and he himself can speak directly to people. Though the media speaks of Obama's grassroots supporters - I don't think that Obama himself really has tried to use the netroots that are there to help him get support for his agenda. I do think he could on both health care and the environment. I wish I could say that Kerry has reached out to keep the netroots as a force - as he did in late 2004. It might be that he feels this would step on Obama's domain as the leader of the party. If you think of cap and trade, a key Kerry issue - it would be awkward for Kerry to rally the netroots if Obama is not going to stand strongly behind it. Kerry likely does not want to be aligned against Obama. On foreign policy issues, Kerry might have had to choose between being a trusted adviser and putting out his own ideas on the internet. At any rate, in the 2 months since Obama has been President, Kerry has not had the internet presence he had in 2005 - 2008.
I actually do not see the hedge fund issue as black and white. In Kerry's comments to Kudlow after the Faneuil Hall speech on economics in 2007, Kerry gave an answer that spoke of the need for completely fixing teh tax code and spoke of unintended consequences of making piecemeal changes. In addition to the concern of technology or small businesses getting investment money, there was also concern that the Hedge funds would move offshore. Could this lead to essentially removing all taxation as an unintended consequence that would be especially damaging to states like MA where they are now located? The real question also seems to come down on the amount of risk taken by the managers. This should be easy to see now - as, if there was real risk, they should have done horribly last year.
I am not saying that he is right - I am saying that I don't know enough to know whether the consequences of that bill as written passed at that point in time would have been good. As it was, I don't think it came to a vote. Kerry has spoken against the special pages in the tax code for companies and individuals. The true test is whether he will push to actually work to clean up the tax code. (Obama has spoken of the same thing - and he is in a better position to implement it.) I am less ready to ascribe this to doing this for his friends or some class based thing. (Also, I don't know if the Hedge fund managers are old school elite.)
I also don't think Kerry did or should FOLLOW the netroots. I think it was the situation in Iraq that caused his GRADUAL change to Kerry/Feingold. I actually see a large amount in common between his Path Forward of October 2005 and Kerry/Feingold. I think the Path Forward was heavily influenced by what he saw in Iraq and what the military told him coupled with his own experience in Vietnam. The latter especially influencing his call for the US to get out of search and destroy and policing. (The interviews at the end of 2005 sounded like the editorial he wrote when Bob Kerrey was accused of war crimes.)
This does not mean that I think he, his peers and the President should not hear (or read0 what the concerns of the netroots are. They should and they should explain when they come down at a different place. To me wanting to be the "netroots favorite" at all times by always taking the positions the netroots favor is no better than following the polls. I want my Senators using their best judgment and voting their conscience. This will mean I will sometimes disagree -like when Menendez held up the 2 Obama appointments because of the unrelated Cuba policy or when both voted for the toture bill.
I do get your anger at Kerry getting projects for MA, but I also have watched the SFRC hearings where I hope he is delving into big global issues with enough depth and with the right people to develop a "sandbox" for exploring innovative ideas that might make for good policy. I think Kerry would have made a great President and am less convinced he should have opted out in 2007 than I once was. I think he would have made an extraordinary SoS - but that was Obama's choice and one that still hurts. At this point, Kerry's future is not something that depends much on the opinion in the blogosphere - but in the opinions of Obama and his peers in the Senate. Other than that, all he has to do is keep MA happy enough with him. As for me, the Nation and lefties to the contrary, he is the politician I most trust. This is knowing he is human and he will make mistakes. I think the biggest problem the lefties have is that Kerry is genuinely independent and not an ideologue. He bothers them more than they are bothered by more predictable Senators because he has taken incredible stands they agree with, that the Schumers of the Senate would never contemplate, then stuns them by unexpectedly take a stand with equal strength that they don't like.
But this is all digression - and what I want to say was that it was great to have had the four years of debating, mostly in agreement, and I am really really glad that I had the chance to meet you. You are an incredibly nice, brilliant person. Good luck with everything and enjoy the extra time with those lovely kids.
|