Obama and the Hamiltonian Democrats. - Democratic Underground

madfloridian

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Jul-21-11 02:31 PM
Original message

Obama and the Hamiltonian Democrats.

As I have been trying to cope with my anger over the way seniors have been stressed out over fears of "reform" to Social Security, I remembered an article by Harold Meyerson in the Washington Post in 2006. It was called Hamiltonian Democrats. It was about the new Hamilton Project of the Brookings Institute.

Hamiltonian Democrats

It's come to this: The chief project to restate Democratic economics for our time was unveiled a couple of weeks ago, and it's named after the father of American conservatism, Alexander Hamilton.

Necessarily, the authors of the Hamilton Project preface their declaration with an attempt, not altogether successful, to reclaim Hamilton from the right. The nation's first secretary of the Treasury, they note, "stood for sound fiscal policy, believed that broad-based opportunity for advancement would drive American economic growth, and recognized that 'prudent aids and encouragements on the part of government' are necessary to enhance and guide market forces."

Which is true, as far as it goes. Hamilton believed in balanced budgets and in the government's taking an active role to build the infrastructure and fiscal climate that business and the nation need to succeed -- ideas as alien to the current administration as support for collective farms. But Hamilton also feared the common people, dismissed their capacity for self-government and supported rule by elites instead.

That might be enough to deter most Democrats from naming their firstborn economic revitalization scheme after him, but the authors of the Hamilton Project are made of sterner stuff. They include Peter Orszag, an estimable Brookings Institution economist; investment banker Roger Altman, formerly of the Clinton Treasury department; and, chiefly, former Treasury secretary and current Citigroup executive committee Chairman Robert Rubin, whose iconic status within the Democratic mainstream has waxed as the median incomes of Americans under the Bush presidency have waned. Rubin has also become a seal of good housekeeping for Democratic candidates seeking money from Wall Street. When Bob Rubin talks, Democratic pols don't just listen; they scramble for front-row seats and make a show of taking notes.

Did you see that sentence? "Rubin has also become a seal of good housekeeping for Democratic candidates seeking money from Wall Street"

Obama was one of the main speakers at the 2006 opening of the Hamilton Project.

Restoring America's Promise of Opportunity, Prosperity and Growth

Moderator:
Peter Orszag
Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution

Panel One: Restoring America's Promise of Opportunity, Prosperity, and Growth

Senator Barack Obama (D-IL)

Robert Rubin
Director and Chairman of the Executive Committee, Citigroup Inc.

The Reverend Jim Wallis
Founder, Sojourners; Author, God's Politics

Transcribed from the pdf version of Senator Obama's speech.

Obama is speaking of Robert Rubin. They were talking about the "losers" in the new free market economy.

Bob and I have had a running debate now for about a year about how do we, in fact, deal with the losers in a globalized economy. There has been a tendency in the past for us to say, well, look, we have got to grow the pie, and we will retrain those who need retraining. But in fact we have never taken that side of the equation as seriously as we need to take it. So hopefully, this is not just going to be a lot of preaching to the choir. Hopefully, part of what we are going to be doing is challenging our own conventional wisdom and pushing boundaries and testing these ideas in a vigorous and aggressive way.

....Just remember, as we move forward, that there are real consequences to the work that is being done here. There are people in places like Decatur, Illinois, or Galesburg,Illinois, who have seen their jobs eliminated. They have lost their health care. They have lost their retirement security. They don't have a clear sense of how their children will succeed in the same way that they succeeded. They believe that this may be the first generation in which their children do worse than they do. Some of that, then, will end up manifesting itself in the sort of nativist sentiment, protectionism, and anti-immigration sentiment that we are debating here in Washington. So there are real consequences to the work that is being done here. This is not a bloodless process.

It is indeed not bloodless, and now 5 years later we feel the pain. Yes, there are real consequences when you forget about the putting the people first.

There was an article in the Financial Times 2006 about this Hamilton Project. The link has only the title, but no article...but here is part of it.

Rubin wants to lead Democrats' economic course

"Robert Rubin, the former Treasury secretary under President Bill Clinton and most influential Democratic economic adviser, launched an initiative on Wednesday aimed at influencing the economic policy debate and charting a course “diametrically opposed to the current policy regime”."

..."The Hamilton Project, which will be based at the Brookings Institution, a think-tank, will be run by Peter Orszag, an economist and senior fellow at Brookings. Policy papers unveiled yesterday proposed vouchers for summer schools and giving teachers tenure based on standards for effectiveness. “That is not consistent with certain orthodoxies we are familiar with. I think that’s a fairly controversial proposal. I wouldn’t say that’s a yawner,” said Mr Altman.

The white paper also called for entitlement reform but acknowledged the political constraints that helped stall Mr Bush’s drive to reform Social Security. “The principal problem is one of political choice and will and what is most needed is a bipartisan approach for deciding among the options,” it said.

Barack Obama, a Democrat senator from Illinois, welcomed the initiative as a way of transcending “tired ideologies”.

Also in 2006 James K. Galbraith wrote a column about this group. Some of it was pretty scathing. From the Guardian UK:

A speech I'll never give

On the budget deficit, the Hamiltonians echo the unshakeable Brookings Line: deficits must be cut before anything else can happen. We've been around this track so many times that we might for once consider the politics before the merits. The fact that the Republicans do not share this attitude inevitably means that they get what they want and we never get what we want. Even if budget deficits had important economic costs I'd be prepared to pay them, in order to meet some social and environmental objectives in this country.

..."Deficit-fetishism also underscores and bolsters a longstanding insider campaign to cut and partially privatize the Social Security System. The Hamilton Project strategy document doesn't mention Social Security by name. But it is riddled with codewords about the "long-term entitlement problem" which, it avers, can only be solved by a "bipartisan commission" acting on well-known options, behind closed doors.

In fact, Social Security is our most successful social insurance program. It is in better financial shape than ever. No economic or budget imperative requires that it be cut, now or in the reasonably foreseeable future. There is no Social Security crisis, and no real "long-term problem" involving the program. Medicare and Medicaid are also not the worst parts of our health care system; the problem of health care insurance could best be dealt with by expanding, not cutting those programs. The Hamilton Project's promise to deal with these issues by "bi-partisan consensus" behind closed doors is a promise to exclude the voices of labour, the elderly, the poor, and loudmouths like me. I will resist. The correct policy toward Social Security is, and remains, what the late Robert Eisner always recommended: leave it alone.

After those words by Obama in 2006 at the opening of the Hamilton Project,I expected something, some ideas to comfort or ease the pain of the people. But there was nothing said. Here is how he ended his speech.

I think that as long as all of us retain that sense of passion about the ultimate outcome that we want, which is a stronger, more prosperous America than we are passing on to our children, then I think we will do well in this process. I am glad to be a part of it.

He seems to be saying that if they remain strong their policies will prevail, but they need to be aware of the pain being caused. No solutions are offered or discussed for helping that pain.

That is not enough empathy in my mind. That same lack of empathy shows today, I believe. There appears to be little concern for those suffering the pain right now. We are expected to "eat our peas."