Will Obama endorse Bush's end of Social Security via "partial privatization individual Accounts"

papau

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu May-10-07 09:18 PM
Original message

Will Obama endorse Bush's end of Social Security via "partial privatization individual Accounts"

Edited on Thu May-10-07 09:27 PM by papau

Will Obama endorse Bush's end of Social Security via "partial privatization individual Accounts" as his advisers suggest?

Obama's detailed positions on issues are in general not yet known, but are promised over the next few months. For now all we can do is look at the advisers he has chosen in each policy area. And for that we have interesting review of the positions taken in the past by those Obama has chosen to advise him and to structure the details of the positions he will endorse over the coming months http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=&sid=a7Zdp3HDltW4&refer=home ("Obama's Economic Brain Trust Breaks With `Status Quo' " by Rich Miller and Matthew Benjamin). While a candidates’ position paper is preferred of course, this has to be a better prognosticator than the Nation magazine's used of Hillary's pollster Mark Penn's client list to perhaps reveal her supposed pro-corporate positions - as if a pollster determines a policy position as opposed to determining how a policy position is most effectively packaged.

Obama has described himself as a small step change person, and the New Yorker Magazine's 11 page article http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/05/07/070507fa_fact_macfarquhar made clear that he is a small step conservative, and Osama’s advisers on policy have policy positions which obviously do indicate the direction of his thinking. But again, it is the candidate that makes the final decision - and for all we know he made in choosing some of these folks in his brain trust because he simply wants to hear the other side to, or alternatives to, the progressive point of view.

In any case I thought the positions of the advisors interesting enough to pull their policy positions out of the article above (the policy advisors are three economist academics named Austan Goolsbee, 37, a University of Chicago professor and columnist for The New York Times, Jeffrey Liebman, 39, a pension and poverty expert at Harvard University, and David Cutler, 41, a Harvard health economist, and two lawyers, Daniel K. Tarullo and Michael Froman).

Energy Plan - a $7B over 10 years energy plan where hybrid car production is encouraged by the incentive of a subsidy for employee health insurance for those that produce hybrid cars and alternate fuel cars, with a push for pushing corn alcohol who's oil saving is questioned, and coal to gas, whose clean environmental effect is questioned, has GM saying they prefer a nation solution to the health care problem, and others saying it is an unneeded bailout of large corporations that does not solve health, car mileage improvement, or jobs, yet costs a great deal. Whether it is a progressive, liberal plan is for those on the left to decide. But at least here Obama has a bit of detail - unlike the other areas below.

Trade Agreements - Obama's advisor Austan Goolsbee is going against union pressure to advocate continued Free Trade with none of the minimum wage, human rights, etc. provisions the left talks about but with a job retraining program to cushion the impact on those workers who lose out from globalization. However, also developing policy here is lawyer Daniel K. Tarullo who "escapes easy labeling" - perhaps implying Gollsbee’s “Free” trade position may be modified when Obama decides on his Trade position.

Globalization, trade and economic development - Obama's advisor here is another lawyer who worked for Citibank and is now a member of the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations, Michael Froman. I like Forman's past efforts to push micro- lending and securitization to finance vaccine programs and promote job creation in poor countries, but will these be the policies Obama actually adopts?

Health Plan - beyond the car bailout subsidy for health coverage of employees, Obama policy advisor David Cutler is trying to avoid discussing single payer or Bush's do it yourself health savings accounts, and wants to instead push a new idea that doctors and hospitals would get paid for results - presumably if you died, you would have the satisfaction of knowing they got fewer dollars for your care, unless they can show you were a goner before they got to you. "Patients would be encouraged to take better care of themselves through preventive care and comparison shopping for medical cost savings" - but that sounds like out of pocket expenses you are to minimize by those wise lifestyle choices. Aaron of Brookings questions the government’s ability to quantify the value to society of the treatment you receive so as to modify medical incomes. Will Obama's eventual position reflect the thoughts of the advisors he has chosen in this area - we will have to wait and see.

On Social Security - Obama actually has a proponent of a cut back in Social Security, with a replacement of income cut via individual account advisor in Jeffrey Liebman - who calls this "partial privatization". Is Obama as open to private accounts as his advisor who recommended in the past, along with an aid to McCain, a mix of benefit cuts, tax increases and mandatory personal accounts to shore up the system? Will Obama reject the "no payroll tax wage cap progressive liberal position" as "too big a step to take"? Indeed, will Obama, who promised to preserve what he's called the "essential character" of our old age retirement system, listen to the advisor he has chosen to help with policy in this area?

Indeed it will be interesting to see Obama's eventual policy positions on these issues - and others - and the reaction on the left to those positions. JFK won the hearts of the left with conservative positions present in great speeches with a vision and a great speaking style. In 2008 we may have a repeat of that phenomena - or we may not.