Like A Forclosed House, The Obama Administration Should Renovate Slowly
Written by: Tom Sawyer
I haven’t had the pleasure (?) of moving into a foreclosed property, but I have moved into a house that didn’t have all the personal touches my family desired. I’m assuming the damage many foreclosed properties have, at the time of purchase, would force the new owner into renovation mode immediately. Having acknowledged the need for fixing/change, the first step should be the easiest: look around to assess what needs to be changed, what the owner wants to change and decide how to go about completing the project. At this point, it would be unreasonable to do everything at once. As a matter of fact, doing everything at once would bring about more chaos and would make it difficult to control the budget for each project. Raise your hand if you’ve ever completed a project at home and the costs were (way) more than you anticipated. Yeah, I knew I wasn’t the only one.
You know where this is going right?
How can President Obama, or the head of any organization for that matter, take control and expect to fix everything at once? The short/quick answer is you can’t and newsflash, trying to do so in America isn’t going so well currently, but things could change. We can go around and around about political parties, but at some point it would be wise to at least consider whether or not the Republicans’ negative comments towards Obama have turned from party hate to reality.
Taking on the recession, the health care system and a new energy problem all at once could turn out to be President Obama’s fatal flaw. For the record, I want to see him succeed, but just because I want it doesn’t mean I’m going to look past some mis-steps along the way. It might have been a better idea to go one at a time and finish, or establish, each “project” the same as you would a renovation project in a house. This isn’t Extreme Government Makeover so an amazing renovation cannot be completed in (7 days on the TV show) 6 months. If you are keeping track of the clock, we are 12.5% through the Obama administration leaving 87.5% on the clock – half way through with the first quarter.
Colin Powell, someone who has my utmost respect, feels the same way. “I think one of the cautions that has to be given to the president — and I’ve talked to some of his people about this — is that you can’t have so many things on the table that you can’t absorb it all. And we can’t pay for it all,” Powell said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”
Let’s not forget, Powell was one of the key players in the strategic planning of Desert Storm and served as Secretary of State during Bush’s first term. Powell also saw something wrong with the way Bush was running the country and had no problem leaving the Bush administration – purely my opinion. Some will say Powell left because he mis-represented himself, AKA lied, some will say Bush kind of fired him and others will look at it my way. But looking at his entire history, I would say he smelled something stinking, threw up the peace sign and left!
To be fair, here is a comment from someone calling themselves “Ohio Citizen” concerning this subject: “Powell is hedging. I think the President will triumph when the economy turns, and it will certainly turn. The thing President Obama has is the audacity to actually tackle some of the fundamental weaknesses that have kept us in the boom and bust cycle. I look forward to reading the talking points of conservatives and republicans in 2011 and 2012. I suppose they will find a way to give themselves credit for our prosperity even though they are predicting gloom and doom. America is great and we have a great President leading us with courage and foresight, Powell’s coldfeet not withstanding.”
The whole thing could boil down to making one of two choices: current spending or current unemployment, health care, etc. President Obama (obviously) isn’t worried about current spending and that has many people, including most Republicans, worried about the future of our country. To those people – I may actually be one of them – I ask, could we continue to do the same things we were doing and expect different results? I admit, I wouldn’t want to tackle so many tough projects at once, but if the house is falling down around you, you have to do something more than just fix the front door.
Tags: Colin Powell on Obama's initiatives, Obama administration energy, Obama Administration health care, Obama administration recession, Too many initiatives could be the Obama Administration's downfall, Too much too soon for Obama?
July 6th, 2009 at 6:59 am
That was a great post. I absolutely agree with one caveat; President Obama does not have the luxury of doing one thing at a time. It is political suicide to do one thing at a time. The majority of the public will not accept the slow pace that would occur and the politicians use different items on the agenda to leverage what they need (i.e. I’ll vote for yours if you vote for mine).
In a perfect world, I think that handling one crisis at a time would be the most productive way of handling the situation, but that cannot happen. If we wait for the economy to be “fixed”, there may not be anytime left for him to “fix” health care, Social Security, etc.
July 6th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
@Stefanie Devery – I’m not sure what portion of the public you’re referring to; it’s certainly not the majority. Just about everyone I know whether they’re an Obama supporter or not is concerned with the rush the Obama administration has put on everything.
Everyone I know wants the government to slow down and read the God forsaken bills BEFORE they’re signed into law. I have a real difficult time trying to understand people like yourself who constantly make excuses for Obama’s absurd fear mongering tactics.
In a perfect world the Obama administration would have taken the time to create a stimulus package that actually stimulated the economy instead of special interest pet projects of all the liberal senators. Would you like to explain to me why such a small percentage of the stimulus money has hit the economy? Because it wasn’t meant to stimulate the economy it was Obama not letting an opportunity/crisis go to waste. Quit making excuses and hold our government responsible for their actions, whether republican or democrat.
By the way your last comment has a resounding echo of something I heard Rahm Emanuel say:
“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. What I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before. This is an opportunity. What used to be long-term problems — be they in the health care area, energy area, education area, fiscal area, tax area, regulatory reform area — things that we had postponed for too long that were long-term are now immediate and must be dealt with. And this crisis provides the opportunity for us, as I would say, the opportunity to do things that you could not do before.”
July 6th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Tom,
In the real world people like you and me have budgets we HAVE to keep and credit limits on our accounts but what if we didn’t and we decided to tackle everything at once? Well, we’d be kicked out on the street and the bank would repossess our home. I just love how our government has continued to bury us in debt year after year and to think the economy is just going to rebound after the horrendous spending that is taking place is just plain ignorant and any recovery we do see will be artificial just as the Bush rebate checks were back in 08 (IMO). We’re throwing (have thrown) bad money at bad debt and spending even more money on top of that.
Another great (FAIR) post Tom.
July 6th, 2009 at 2:52 pm
Thanks Ryan (I would appreciate a Stumble if you could). Daily I’m fine-tuning my opinion about where we are headed. I support Obama much more than I did Bush or would have McCain (because of Palin), but that doesn’t mean I think the administration is doing everything correctly. Like you mentioned, where is the money that was supposed to stimulate the economy? I think the Bush administration gave out the money without asking for a “receipt” and the Obama administration allowed many loopholes that allow the money to vanish. Is the created debt going to vanish? Not hardly.
July 6th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
To be fair, I was not defending President Obama. Throughout the course of history, presidents generally have less than one year to do whatever it is they beleive is important. If it has not been started within the first year, the majority of the time it will not get accomplished.
That said, I do not believe that you are the majority. People do not want the President of the United States focusing on one item at a time. There is not enough time in his presidency for him to do that. If he only took care of the economy, then nothing else would get accomplished.
Further, the money has been introduced into the economy but it is going to take some time to reach everywhere it needs to reach. There is no magic, secret formula that will allow the economy to rebound over night. I do not believe that we are throwing good money after bad. We are just rhwoing more money in the hopes that something will work.
This is the worst economic crisis the world has ever seen and the worst the US has seen since The Great Depression. No one has the perfect plan. But there at least has to be a plan, even if everyone does not agree with it (including myself).
July 6th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
@Tom Sawyer – Stumbled it for you Tom.
July 6th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
First let me say I think using the foreclosure analogy to introduce this topic was great! It makes (at least for me) the situation that President Obama is in, digestable. Does that make sense? I am hopeful that the money already used to stimulate the economy will eventually do what it’s supposed to do–stimulate. I know Ryan, I am being overly optimistic, but I think because the economy was in such dire straits when President Obama took office, most people were looking for him to produce a miracle — that everything would magically become better. Unfortunately, the real world doesn’t work that way so, as I’ve said so many times before, I will wait for him to be in office a year before I cast judgement (yea or nay) on what President Obama is doing to (and/or for) our country.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:44 pm
@Stefanie Devery – @Kim Sawyer –
I know I’m Mr. Argumentative but let’s stop for one second and think about how the stimulus took place. Our President and many prominent Democrats used scare tactics to force the bill through. We were told unemployment would reach upwards of 9.5% if the bill wasn’t passed immediately. With the bill we were supposed to top off at 8.5% UE.
My point isn’t the obvious lack of economic judgment or pure misleading statements. My point is the rush, the urgency, the critical nature of how they forced it through. Now with that kind of urgency why wasn’t money pouring into our economy immediately and why is still not pouring into the economy? Is it a coincidence that a majority of the money will be dispersed in 2011 and 2012? (Election Year)
Instead of just making points I’ll offer suggestions. First, I don’t support throwing printed/bad money at a troubled economy because all you’re doing is prolonging the inevitable. However, if Obama and his administration really wanted to turn the country around and address unemployment issues why didn’t they put mass amounts of immediate construction projects in the bill?
They could have initiated the construction of Nuclear power plants (reduce dependence on foreign oil), massive road projects (create construction jobs, stimulate material and heave equipment companies, and relieve congestion on the roads.), low income housing complexes (Provide the same as road construction but would benefit the thousands of people who are newly homeless or soon to be), health care clinics, etc… Eerily similar to the “New Deal” yes but would have created jobs nonetheless. I wouldn’t have supported this type of real stimulus either because spending money you don’t have is never a good idea, government or individual, especially when you’re already over 11 trillion in the hole.
However, instead of doing anything that would promote immediate stimulus they proposed pet projects like the 7 billion dollar high speed train from LA to Vegas which if immediately started would create jobs but is solely for the benefit the economies of two cities. They also extended unemployment but held the states who took the assistance to more federal governmental control. Is $25 extra a week worth a state losing power?
Look at this chart and ask yourself, where is the urgency? The same urgency that was in place while forcing the bill through the house and senate.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Economy/images/wm2454_chart1.gif
@Stefanie Devery – In regards to “Bad Money” what do you think is the primary trigger to our whole crisis? The housing crisis! What did Bush and then Obama do? They through BILLIONS of printed dollars to the banks who held toxic assets from the housing crisis. So the foreclosures created bad debt for the financial institutions and then the government gave them money we didn’t (and don’t) have. And now they’re throwing more money we don’t have at a political power play stimulus. My point being it is “ BAD money.”
July 6th, 2009 at 10:19 pm
@Ryan Kazinec – I don’t think you are argumentative. I think you are standing by your viewpoint, which is cool. You make a sound argument and present good suggestions. I think Obama is OTJT (on the job training) and what happens when you start a new job? You learn as you go and you make mistakes. The key is to take detailed notes so that you don’t make the same mistakes over and over again.
Typically, when starting a new job, you’re given a “trial period” so to speak to learn the job. Sometimes, it’s six months and can be as much as one year. Instead of hammering Obama right off the bat, I will allow him a “trial period” for a year. I truly hear what you’re saying — and on some of your points, I agree with you (e.g. spending way too much money too fast) but before I say he’s damaging the entire country and limiting our freedom in certain ways, hmmmmm, I have to wait and see about that.
August 14th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
Foreclosed, not Forclosed.
April 27th, 2010 at 7:49 pm
Begin with and maintain a clear and written understanding of all services and all charges for them. If questions still remain or some terms are unclear it is strongly advised that you ask for clarification before signing up for anything.