Quibbles and Bits – the Back Pages 1/6/09

Here are a few things that caught my eye even as other stories catch the headlines today.

1) Paul Krugman at NYT says the Obama stimulus plan won’t do too much to help the economy. He seems to think the plan is too tepid.

Bit by bit we’re getting information on the Obama stimulus plan, enough to start making back-of-the-envelope estimates of impact. The bottom line is this: we’re probably looking at a plan that will shave less than 2 percentage points off the average unemployment rate for the next two years, and possibly quite a lot less. This raises real concerns about whether the incoming administration is lowballing its plans in an attempt to get bipartisan consensus.

Read the rest ->
2) In an article for Slate, Eliot Sptizer (yes, THAT one) says Obama stimulus should be for “transformative” investment rather than roads, bridges, etc.

. . . This introduces the second major problem: The “off the shelf” infrastructure projects that can be funded immediately and provide immediate demand-side stimulus are almost by definition not the transformative investments we really need. Paving roads, repairing bridges that need refurbishing, and accelerating existing projects are all good and necessary, but not transformative. These projects by and large are building or patching the same economy with the same flaws that got us where we are. Our concern should be that as we look for the next great infrastructure project to transform our economy, we might rebuild the Erie Canal and find ourselves a century behind technologically.

———————-
In the energy arena, two investments are critical. The first is smart meters. These would permit, with a smart grid, time-of-day pricing for all consumers, with potentially double-digit reductions in peak demand, significant cost savings, and consequential remarkable energy and environmental impacts.
————–
Second, the most significant hurdle to beginning the shift to nongasoline-based cars is the lack of an infrastructure to distribute the alternative energy, whether it is electricity—plug-in hybrids—or natural gas or even hydrogen.
——————
In health care, everybody agrees that electronic record-keeping is a universal win:. . . .
—————–
America lags the world in Internet service and access. Our Internet backbone is worse than that of competing nations. We should spend to upgrade it.
—————-
In education—just as much a part of our infrastructure as bridges and roads—here is a small investment that is one of my favorites: Provide funding for robotics teams at every school.

OK. These ideas represent worthy projects, although unoriginal ones. But I just can’t take this guy seriously. Or does he have some “transformational” investment ideas for the world’s oldest profession?

3) The New Yorker has a comment piece on Obama. Quite frankly, I think TNY needed some filler.

It starts off with a brief history tidbit about slaves helping build the White House and quickly moves to the remarkable idea that an AA man (I know, I know, he’s NOT AA), will be moving in soon.

The writer revels in the idea that in “troubled times” American has turned to a change agent whose background reflects old wounds and healing. And the prose is nearly that purple. Moving on to the Israel / Palestinian conflict, the writer ends the piece like this:

. . . as Obama told his listeners at AIPAC last June, there remains the Talmudic imperative of tikkun olam, “the obligation to repair the world.” In four years, or eight, he may well have won no Nobel medal, made no final repair. But the obligation of constant engagement is deep; the cost of negligence is paid in blood. And, what is more, history has proved that the seemingly impossible can be achieved: the Irish and the English have all but resolved a conflict that began in the days of Oliver Cromwell, and on January 20th an African-American President will cross the color line and move into the White House––a house that slaves helped build.

I think the writer’s purpose was to “capture the moment.” You know, where the writer marks this as a “time of peril and import and meaning.” But invocations to history where Obama is concerned is already a cliche and reading this bit just makes me want to throw something. Don’t bother reading.

4) The Chicago Sun-TImes has taken a side in the Burris seating kerfluffle.

This is not about race. Despite what U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush has said explicitly, and others have implied, the bid to keep Roland Burris from claiming Illinois’ vacant Senate seat is not about race.

It is about denying power to a governor who has gone off the deep end.

It is about ensuring a taint-free appointment for the citizens of Illinois.

And to say otherwise is destructive and wrong. Illinois has enough problems without injecting the thorny issue of race where it doesn’t belong.

And then they call out Bobby Rush for pushing the race angle.

But we also blame U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush.

He is the one who strode up to the podium during Burris’ announcement last week and dropped the racial bomb.

Rush suggested that opposition to Burris could be racist.

“I don’t think that anyone, any U.S. senator, who’s sitting [in] the Senate right now, wants to go on record to deny one African American from being seated in the U.S. Senate,” Rush said.

He went further on Sunday, calling the Senate “the last bastion of plantation America.” He also said Senate Democrats who won’t seat Burris are “going to have to come and ask for forgiveness” from black Americans, according to the Chicago Tribune.

We agree with Rush on the pressing need for African Americans in the Senate. With Obama’s resignation, there is none now.

But trying to guilt the nation into accepting a tainted appointment is no way to make right that wrong.

The Chicago Sun-Times DID NOT just call out Bobby Rush for playing the race card did it? Irony much?

5) Tweety’s brother says the “newsman” won’t run for office.

Jim Matthews, a Republican commissioner in Montgomery County, emphasized that it’s his opinion — he didn’t hear it directly out of his brother’s mouth. But he said his brother was very upbeat about returning to “Hardball” and already had a new contract offer in hand from the cable news network.

We’ve speculated here at NQ that the idea of a Matthews run might be a ploy to get a bigger contract out of MSNBC. Although Matthews seems in earnest about a potential run, it’s hard to know what would be worse – seeing him continue his “news” show or seeing him as a US Senator. Either way, it’s a total waste of a good chair.

6) WaPo says CNN medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, is Obama’s pick for US surgeon general. Apparently, he wants the job.

Gupta has told administration officials that he wants the job, and the final vetting process is under way. He has asked for a few days to figure out the financial and logistical details of moving his family from Atlanta to Washington but is expected to accept the offer.
—————-
Gupta’s only hesitation in taking the post is said to involve the financial impact on his pregnant wife and two children if he gives up his lucrative medical and journalistic careers. But he is expected to accept the position within days.

I’d like to say I care about this, but I don’t really. Gupta seems to be doing a good job at CNN, but CNN “ain’t what it used to be.” Seems to me the surgeon general job is mainly bully pulpit, but at least Gupta wouldn’t have to sit for makeup every day. Wonder, though, if he’d choose to wear the uniform?

7) Let’s start the clock. According to realclearpolitics, Obama says “no earmarking” in stimulus bill.

President-elect Barack Obama warned that he will inherit a $1 trillion budget deficit upon taking office, and pledged to ban all earmarks as an attempt to address both the “deficit of dollars and the deficit of trust.”

“We’re going to have to stop talking about budget reform. We’re going to have to fully embrace it,” he said after a meeting with his economic team this morning. “It’s an absolute necessity.”

He said his stimulus plan will “set a new, higher standard of accountability, transparency and oversight,” and include an economic recovery oversight board, as well as an online platform so that citizens could monitor spending. He’s expected to speak in greater detail about his plan later this week.

Think this will happen? Will we have a “new, higher standard of accountability, transparency and oversight?” Have we so far? What was Obama’s campaign like? I think we should keep a close eye on this promise.