http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081201/klein

In Praise of a Rocky Transition

Lookout

By Naomi Klein
The Nation.: November 13, 2008 - in the December 1, 2008 edition

The more details emerge, the clearer it becomes that Washington's handling
of the Wall Street bailout is not merely incompetent. It is borderline
criminal.

In a moment of high panic in late September, the US Treasury unilaterally
pushed through a radical change in how bank mergers are taxed--a change long
sought by the industry. Despite the fact that this move will deprive the
government of as much as $140 billion in tax revenue, lawmakers found out
only after the fact. According to the Washington Post, more than a dozen tax
attorneys agree that "Treasury had no authority to issue the [tax change]
notice."

Of equally dubious legality are the equity deals Treasury has negotiated
with many of the country's banks. According to Congressman Barney Frank, one
of the architects of the legislation that enables the deals, "Any use of
these funds for any purpose other than lending--for bonuses, for severance
pay, for dividends, for acquisitions of other institutions, etc.--is a
violation of the act." Yet this is exactly how the funds are being used.

Then there is the nearly $2 trillion the Federal Reserve has handed out in
emergency loans. Incredibly, the Fed will not reveal which corporations have
received these loans or what it has accepted as collateral. Bloomberg News
believes that this secrecy violates the law and has filed a federal suit
demanding full disclosure.

Despite all of this potential lawlessness, the Democrats are either openly
defending the administration or refusing to intervene. "There is only one
president at a time," we hear from Barack Obama. That's true. But every
sweetheart deal the lame-duck Bush administration makes threatens to hobble
Obama's ability to make good on his promise of change. To cite just one
example, that $140 billion in missing tax revenue is almost the same sum as
Obama's renewable energy program. Obama owes it to the people who elected
him to call this what it is: an attempt to undermine the electoral process
by stealth.

Yes, there is only one president at a time, but that president needed the
support of powerful Democrats, including Obama, to get the bailout passed.
Now that it is clear that the Bush administration is violating the terms to
which both parties agreed, the Democrats have not just the right but a grave
responsibility to intervene forcefully.

I suspect that the real reason the Democrats are so far failing to act has
less to do with presidential protocol than with fear: fear that the stock
market, which has the temperament of an overindulged 2-year-old, will throw
one of its world-shaking tantrums. Disclosing the truth about who is
receiving federal loans, we are told, could cause the cranky market to bet
against those banks. Question the legality of equity deals and the same
thing will happen. Challenge the $140 billion tax giveaway and mergers could
fall through. "None of us wants to be blamed for ruining these mergers and
creating a new Great Depression," explained one unnamed Congressional aide.

More than that, the Democrats, including Obama, appear to believe that the
need to soothe the market should govern all key economic decisions in the
transition period. Which is why, just days after a euphoric victory for
"change," the mantra abruptly shifted to "smooth transition" and
"continuity."

Take Obama's pick for chief of staff. Despite the Republican braying about
his partisanship, Rahm Emanuel, the House Democrat who received the most
donations from the financial sector, sends an unmistakably reassuring
message to Wall Street. When asked on This Week With George Stephanopoulos
whether Obama would be moving quickly to increase taxes on the wealthy, as
promised, Emanuel pointedly did not answer the question.

This same market-coddling logic should, we are told, guide Obama's selection
of treasury secretary. Fox News's Stuart Varney explained that Larry
Summers, who held the post under Clinton, and former Fed chair Paul Volcker
would both "give great confidence to the market." We learned from MSNBC's
Joe Scarborough that Summers is the man "the Street would like the most."

Let's be clear about why. "The Street" would cheer a Summers appointment for
exactly the same reason the rest of us should fear it: because traders will
assume that Summers, champion of financial deregulation under Clinton, will
offer a transition from Henry Paulson so smooth we will barely know it
happened. Someone like FDIC chair Sheila Bair, on the other hand, would
spark fear on the Street--for all the right reasons.

One thing we know for certain is that the market will react violently to any
signal that there is a new sheriff in town who will impose serious
regulation, invest in people and cut off the free money for corporations. In
short, the markets can be relied on to vote in precisely the opposite way
that Americans have just voted. (A recent USA Today/Gallup poll found that
60 percent of Americans strongly favor "stricter regulations on financial
institutions," while just 21 percent support aid to financial companies.)

There is no way to reconcile the public's vote for change with the market's
foot-stomping for more of the same. Any and all moves to change course will
be met with short-term market shocks. The good news is that once it is clear
that the new rules will be applied across the board and with fairness, the
market will stabilize and adjust. Furthermore, the timing for this
turbulence has never been better. Over the past three months, we've been
shocked so frequently that market stability would come as more of a
surprise. That gives Obama a window to disregard the calls for a seamless
transition and do the hard stuff first. Few will be able to blame him for a
crisis that clearly predates him, or fault him for honoring the clearly
expressed wishes of the electorate. The longer he waits, however, the more
memories fade.

When transferring power from a functional, trustworthy regime, everyone
favors a smooth transition. When exiting an era marked by criminality and
bankrupt ideology, a little rockiness at the start would be a very good
sign.

About Naomi Klein

Naomi Klein is an award-winning journalist and syndicated columnist and the
author of the international and New York Times bestseller The Shock
Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism (September 2007); an earlier
international best-seller, No Logo: Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies; and the
collection Fences and Windows: Dispatches from the Front Lines of the
Globalization Debate (2002). more...

***

http://www.zcommunications.org/zspace/commentaries/368

Not Yet at the Promised Land

By Robert Weissman
Robert Weissman's ZSpace Page: Nov 13, 2008

Over the past week, Americans -- and people around the world -- rightfully
celebrated the breakthrough election of an African-American to be President
of the United States.

Barack Obama's election signals a significant shift in U.S. racial
attitudes, especially among younger people. Obama received a higher portion
of the white vote than Democratic candidate John Kerry did in 2004 -- in
fact, he won a higher share (43 percent) than any Democratic candidate since
Jimmy Carter in 1976. Obama won a strong majority of white voters under age
29 (beating McCain 54-44).

Such a performance by a Black candidate was very hard to imagine even two
years ago.

But as epochal as is Obama's victory, celebrations of racial progress --
especially among Whites -- need be tempered by an acknowledgement of other
racial realities.

The United States has not reached the promised land of racial equality and
justice.

Consider this set of extraordinary statistics:

* The U.S. unemployment rate for Whites in October was 5.3 percent. For
Latinos, it was 8.8 percent. For African-Americans, 11.1 percent. [1]

* African-Americans' median income is about 80 percent of Whites. Latinos
make about 72 percent of Whites' median income. [2] The median White
household income in 2007 was $54,920. For Blacks, it was $33,916. For
Latinos, $38,679. [3]

* White households have 10 times more wealth than Black households. Median
household wealth for Whites is $118,300; for Blacks, it is $11,800 (2004
data). [4]

* Whites have more than 100 times the financial wealth of Blacks. Median
financial wealth for Whites is $36,100, for Blacks $300 (2004 data). [5]

* The African-American poverty rate is three times higher than the rate for
Whites. Poverty rates: Whites, 8.2 percent; Blacks, 24.5 percent; Latinos,
21.5 percent. [6]

* Child poverty rates track the overall poverty ratios. About one in 10
White children live in poverty (10.5 percent). For African-Americans, the
figure is 33.2 percent. For Latinos, 28.9 percent (2004 data). [7]

* Three quarters of White families own their home. Less than half of Blacks
and Latinos own their home. [8]

* The percentage of Whites with a bachelor's or more advanced degree is
30.5. For African-Americans, it is 17.7. For Latinos, 12 percent. Two-and-a-
half times more Whites have PhDs or professional degrees than Blacks or
Latinos. And education is among the social indicators where the Black- White
disparity is closing fastest. [9]

* The African-American infant mortality rate is 2.4 times the rate for
Whites. [10]

* African-American children are exposed to unsafe lead levels two-and-a-
half times the rate for White children (2002 data). [11]

* The incarceration rate for African-Americans is 4.8 times higher than for
Whites. For Latinos, it is 1.6 times higher than for Whites. [12]

The economic crisis will make almost all of these numbers worse.
Unemployment and poverty rates will go up for everyone, but jump the most
for Blacks and Latinos. African-American wealth is being decimated. While
they don't have much in the stock market, on average, African American
wealth is concentrated in housing stock that is declining in value, and
African Americans were disproportionately lured into predatory and
unsustainable subprime loans. Cutbacks in social services will
disproportionately hurt Black and Latino families.

What can be done to close these gaps, so that the remarkable story of Barack
Obama signals not just a cultural shift, but helps drive a reduction in
wealth and income inequality?

The good news in this story is that the best hope lies in many of the
policies needed to address the economic crisis and economic insecurity. A
massive increase in government spending in public works, energy efficiency
and renewable energy will create good jobs employing people of all colors.
Passage of the Employee Free Choice Act will enable workers to join unions
without having to face employer intimidation.. Unions raise up worker wages
(and improve quality of worklife, among other crucial benefits), thereby
reducing inequality. And adoption of a single-payer health system -- a
Medicare for All plan that provides every person with access to quality
healthcare while eliminating costly bureaucratic waste -- would reduce
healthcare disparities.

Will the Obama administration deliver on these policy goals? Unfortunately,
while Obama has promised healthcare reform, he has not supported a
single-payer plan. There are very hopeful signs that he will push a massive
public investment plan. And he supports the Employee Free Choice Act, though
passage is definitely not assured.

Perhaps a better question than asking whether the Obama administration will
deliver on these policy goals is: Will the outpouring of civic energy that
elected the first African-American President in the United States now be
channeled to overcome the forces of reaction and the status quo?

Like the civil rights movement, Obama's election reminds us again what a
mobilized public can achieve.


[1] Bureau of Labor Statistics,
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm>.

[2] Bureau of Labor Statistics,
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/wkyeng.nr0.htm>.

[3] U.S. Census, "Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the
United States: 2007," http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/poverty07.html.

[4] Economic Policy Institute, State of Working America 2008/2009,
http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/tabfig/05/SWA06_Tab5.6.jpg>.

[5] Economic Policy Institute, State of Working America 2008/2009,
http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/tabfig/05/SWA06_Tab5.6.jpg>.

[6] U.S. Census, "Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the
United States: 2007,"
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/poverty07.html>.

[7] Children's Defense Fund, "State of America's Children, 2005,"
http://www.childrensdefense.org/site/DocServer/Greenbook_2005?docID=174

[8] U.S. Census,
<</font>http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/hvs/hvs.html>.

[9] National Center for Education Statistics, "Status and Trends in the
Education of Racial and Ethnic Minorities,"
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/minoritytrends/tables/table_26_1.asp?referrer=report>.

[10] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, "Recent Trends in Infant
Mortality in the United States, National Center for Health Statistics,"
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db09.htm#arethere>.

[11] Children's Defense Fund, "Improving Children's Health: Understanding
Children's Health Disparities and Promising Approaches to Address Them,"
http://www.childrensdefense.org/site/DocServer/CDF_Improving_Children_s_Health_Final.pdf?docID=1781.

[12] Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S.. Department of Justice,
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/jailrairtab.htm>.

Robert Weissman is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Multinational
Monitor, and director of Essential Action.

From: Z Net - The Spirit Of Resistance Lives




------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to