WaPo:
While Geithner has taken dramatic steps to address flashpoints in the economy, the work of carrying out those policies has bogged down because critical decisions about how to do so aren't being made, interviews with a broad range of federal officials show.
Government officials, inside the Treasury and out, say the unresolved issues are piling up in part because of vacancies in the department's top ranks. But some of the officials also cite the Treasury's ad-hoc management, which is dominated by a small band of Geithner's counselors who coordinate rescue initiatives but lack formal authority to make decisions. Heavy involvement by the White House in Treasury affairs has further muddied the picture of who is responsible for key issues, the officials add.
One of the department's signature initiatives, considered vital for getting at the root of the financial crisis, aims at relieving banks of their toxic assets. But to those familiar with the program, it remains unclear who will decide some of the practical details, such as whether foreign firms will be allowed to participate in the funds that buy the assets. This uncertainty is slowing the rollout of the program, which in any case has proven daunting to design. Announced in early February, it may not launch until July, officials say.
In March, Treasury officials clashed over a $15 billion initiative to use money from the federal bailout package to free up credit for small businesses. Geithner's counselors pressed to announce the program quickly, despite protests from the career staff members who said it would not work. Unable to raise the issue with Geithner himself, the staff members appealed directly to the White House but were rebuffed, according to sources familiar with the episode.
President Obama announced the program two months ago, and it is still struggling to get off the ground. Officials are looking to overhaul the proposal.
And in the wake of the public firestorm over bonuses paid by American International Group, senior Treasury officials have been meeting several times a week all spring to review, one by one, the payments to the company's executives. But the time-consuming discussions have never resolved whether any of the executives should get paid.
Geithner said in interviews that some of the department's internal difficulties result from the intense pressure on officials to develop a raft of rescue initiatives in a very short time.
"We were just putting enormous pressure on these people to put in place and execute this comprehensive set of programs," Geithner said. "In a crisis, the most important thing is to show the capacity for credible initiative that is actually going to fix the problem. That's why we are trying to do so much so early." He added, "It could get tough at times . . . but I think they are doing a great job in that context, and they are working 24 hours a day to put out A-plus policy."
Still, some lawmakers and government officials said Geithner needs to be a stronger manager.
"No one knows how to get decisions made," said a senior government official familiar with the Treasury's inner workings. "Major decisions can happen very fast at the top, and then after that there are tons of detail and nuances that have to get worked out without clear chains of command. Either the seats are unfilled . . . or you have to answer to a half a dozen counselors running around."
Maybe the decision-making has been out-sourced to Goldman-Sachs?
After all, the big decision to give, and keep giving, trillions to the banksters with no accountability and no transparency has already been made, and that seems to have worked out quite well for them.
And way down at the bottom of the story, the killer detail:
But now, even minor matters, such as Web site design or news releases, are reviewed by the White House.
The White House is approving Treasury's web site design? Sounds like they're doing what they know how to do, instead of what needs to be done.
Hilarious, if it weren't so serious.
- lambert's blog
- Login or register to post comments



Front page


Comments
too many czars
spoiled the broth.
Crisis - I don't think that word means what they think it does
Kind of like "inconceivable".
How long can a "crisis" last? A year? Two years? Three?
If this is a financial "crisis" where wheels must be greased with capital to keep the economy from imploding, those wheels can't wait a year (as in the small business loan program). Those businesses will be gone by then. So then what would be the point in programs like this? Wouldn't that then require urgency on the part of the government? Unless this is all just falsely using a real (or manufactured) crisis to transfer funds from one class of people to another without regard to the consequences.
Oh, wait.
Sorry, I don't fall in love with politicians. I'm not that desperate.
That would be the cynical or realistic view
That there is no on at Treasury to do any work (a) because the real work (the looting) has already been accomplised and/or (b) the next phase of looting is being privatized.
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi