Weak tea for homeowners from Obama on 60 minutes
In a transcript for tomorrow's 60 Minutes:
[OBAMA] We have not focused on foreclosures and what's happening to homeowners as much as I would like…
And who's responsible for that? And what you mean, "we"? The bailout is the Bush + Reid + Pelosi + Obama + Paulson bill, and though we don't expect anything from Bush or Paulson, I think we had the right to expect a little "change" from Obama, especially, since he was making calls to get the bill passed -- and is now the Leader we've all been waiting for.
I mean, instead of using the bailout as a moment of supreme political leverage to do some good, Reid passed a Christmas tree of a bill that gave Hank Paulson a trillion more to blow at the track, and which did homeowners no good -- despite the fact that a perfectly reasonable, well-attested, historically proven plan was on the table: HOLC, which not only kept people in their homes in the New Deal, but actually made the taxpayers a profit by the end of its life. (HOLC explanation; HOLC posts.)
More weak tea:
[OBAMA] We've got to…set up a negotiation between banks and borrowers so that people can stay in their homes. That is going to have an impact on the economy as a whole.
No shit, Sherlock. And note the policy detail! Still, baby steps. After all, here's where Obama was back on October 1:
We should encourage Treasury to study the option of buying individual mortgages like we did successfully in the 1930’s [this is HOLC, which is modeled after the FDR program, though Obama doesn't mention that].
See, that's the kind of progress we expect from a progressive! All the way from "study" to setting up a "negotiation" in a mere six weeks!
And yet more weak tea:
[OBAMA] And, you know, one thing I'm determined is that if we don't have a clear focused program for homeowners by the time I take office, we will after I take office.
Have you ever heard a vaguer and more parseable answer in your life? Like, when? 2009? By the midterms? 2012? 20126?
It couldn't be clearer what the Village
priorities are, and how little Obama is actually promising to change them: The bankers get trillions NOW NOW NOW, which they promptly stuff in their mattresses after paying themselves, and aren't held accountable for anything, and the homeowner gets a smidgeon LATER LATER LATER, while becoming debt peons.
So far, Obama's "visionary minalism" has turned out to be neither. And don't tell me to lay back and enjoy it because Obama "hasn't done anything yet"; he's going on the teebee exactly to set the national agenda, and if this is where he is on a basic issue like shelter, then we are in for a very rocky ride in the Year Of Our Lord 2009.
NOTE Via Bloomberg.
UPDATE Obama concludes:
And I think that part of this next two months is to really get a clear set of priorities, understanding we're not going be able to do everything at once, making sure the team is in place, and moving forward in a very deliberate way and sending a clear signal to the American people that we're going to be thinking about them and what they're going through.
Sweet Jeebus. Sounds like a cheesy postcard -- "Thinking about you... MR SUBLIMINAL While the Sherriff throws you out of your house.
Clue stick: I already know Obama's thinking about me; He wouldn't have thrown us under the bus randomly, fer gawdsake.
What I'm looking for -- work with me, here, people -- is not some sort of professorial, academic exercise in thoughtfulness, but policies and actions.
Policies and actions, that is, beyond giving Hank Paulson's golfing buddies a trillion or so, with no oversight, NOW NOW NOW (the answer to the "Wait 'til he's done something" crowd).
NOTE The Village is already hard at work faking Obama's FDR image for him. Obama, the poor bastard, I almost feel sorry for him. If you want to see what real leadership looks like, compare FDR's fireside chats to the meaningless drivel I've quoted above. Chnage!