Crunch Time for the Candidates (printable)

Topic: Presidential Campaign 2008
Crunch Time for the Candidates

Barack Obama and John McCain can no longer rely on rhetoric. They have to go on record with regard to the Bush Bailout of Wall Street, and explain what it means for the next administration.
by rtbohan
(libertarian)
Sunday, September 21, 2008

After his defeat in the election of 1932, President Herbert Hoover invited his successful opponent, Franklin D. Roosevelt, to become involved in the Hoover Administration's continuing efforts to deal with the Great Depression. The offer was prompted by the fact that at that time the inauguration of a new President did not take place until March 4. This meant that the Hoover Administration was responsible for dealing with the depression for another four months. Hoover felt that in order to do anything effective he must be sure that he could set up long term policies and programs. He felt that without Roosevelt's open support he could effectively do nothing, and he could not win support for a long term program if the congress and the nation felt that whatever he did might be overturned as soon as Roosevelt took office.

Roosevelt declined the invitation. He realized that he might be criticized for refusing to cooperate in dealing with a national problem. But he also knew that by agreeing to consult with President Hoover he would be accepting responsibility for the decisions that Hoover made even if his advice was contrary to what Hoover eventually did. He realized that this would commit him to certain programs which he might consider wrong before he had the authority to make policy or make him appear to sabotage Hoover's efforts.

This year, as George W. Bush seeks to prevent, or moderate, the economic collapse that his policies created, he is not leaving the two major party candidates the right to opt of the responsibility of either endorsing or opposing his raid on the treasury and the credit of the United States. After recklessly and unconstitutionally raiding the treasury and increasing the debt to pay for bailouts, many not authorized by the Congress, he is asking the Congress to increase the debt limit of the United States by nearly one trillion dollars to allow for a new bailout of one or more industries(

([link edited for length]) Both the major party candidates for President are United States Senators, even though they have been, for the most part, neglecting their duties for more than a year. But this is a question neither is going to be able to avoid if he wishes to be considered seriously as a leader.

President Bush proposed a $3 trillion dollar budget for the coming year, and the national debt is already over $10 trillion dollars. He then sougt and received the approval of the Democratic Congress for a "tax rebate" totally $12 billion, and the Democrats added non-budgeted spending by the Government as the price of their support.

Since the "rebate" or "stimulus package", the administration and the Federal Reserve have paid $80 billion in the bailout of Goldman Sachs, aquired a potential debt of an additional $5 Trillion in the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and embarked on a greater bailout of the financial industry which Secretary of the Treasury Paulson estimates (conservatively ) at another one trillion dollars. The increase in the debt limit which the President is asking for is only a down payment in a program which President Bush intends to have irrevocably in place when his successor takes office.([link edited for length].

What Secretary Paulson is talking about is an unconstitutional grant of authority to President Bush and all of his successors of the right of Congress to control the national debt and the right of the citizens to challange those unconstitutional acts in the courts([link edited for length]). This would be a more disastrous abrogation of power than the frivolous abandonment of Congress of their constitutional power to declare (or not declare) war.

Until now, Senators McCain and Obama have managed to avoid taking a firm stand on this issue. Senator McCain talks of the crisis purely as the result of illegal or unethical acts by brokers and regulators, promises to fire some people and put others in prison and, possibly, tweak the regulations. Senator Obama speaks of stronger regulations, without being specific. Each uses the occasion to take potshots at the other([link edited for length]).

This is a case where the candidates must commit themselves to supporting the President, or come out in clear opposition to it. President Bush has seen to that.

And it is a case where the candidates are free to come down on either side. Unlike the question of off-shore drilling, or elimination or suspension or rebate on the gasoline tax, there is not a clear majority of the voters in favor of the policy. Quite the opposite in fact([link edited for length]).

In this case, the two candidates must take a clear and binding policy decision, not merely talk about what they will do as President. The two candidates must explain clearly what effect their decision will have. And they must show that they are the real leaders of their respective parties, and not just the titular leaders.

The decision involves a question of the nature of the government and the proper role of the government in society. Senator McCain has said that is for small government low taxes and decreased government regulation of the economy. He has also indicated that he intends to pursue an aggressively imperialistic foreign policy and increased military spending. If he sides with the president, he will have to reduce his commitment to spending on the military or give up his promises of low taxes.

Senator Obama favors big government, increased regulation, and the use of taxes to transfer money from the rich to the poor. He also has promised to double foreign aid and provide universal health coverage. Now he has to decide whether giving dictatorial power to the executive branch is what he means by big government. He has to make clear whether hs is as enthusiastic about transfer of income from the poor to the rich is a good idea. And, like Senator McCain, he must explain what effect this will have on his promises of new programs.

And the two must show that they are leaders. Whatever each decides, he must bring his party members in Congress with him in either enacting or rejecting the administration's policy.

This is not a debate and vote on which either candidate can be absent, or vote "Present". Crunch time is surely here for the candidates. Crunch time is also here for Constitutional government and for the people of the United States.

The views expressed in this article are those of rtbohan only and do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. rtbohan is solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.

Report violation by rtbohan of Nolan Chart LLC's terms of use policy.