Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Robert Reich: Democracy Is Better Than Corporatist Negotiation

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 03:23 PM
Original message
Robert Reich: Democracy Is Better Than Corporatist Negotiation
The Obama Plot for a Carbon Tax

Teachable moments are rare in America. George Bush missed the chance right after 9/11 to call for a new era of service to the nation; he asked instead that Americans do more shopping.
Tuesday night, President Obama did not call for a tax on carbon. He didn’t even ask the Senate to pass the cap-and-trade legislation that emerged from the House. Instead, he said there were lots of good ideas out there and he’s willing to consider any of them — which seemed more like a way of declaring cap-and-trade dead.
But maybe the President has a more subtle strategy in mind. Here’s what New York Magazine’s John Heilemann thinks may be going on:

"Lacking the 60 votes necessary for cap-and-trade, the administration plans to get behind a more modest conservation measure in the Senate, then push for a carbon pricing mechanism during the conference committee merger with the House bill — and do so during a lame-duck session after the midterms, when victorious Democrats will find it easier to make a tough vote and losing ones will be freed of political constraints."
............It’s plausible. After all, the President has now gotten BP to agree to a $20 billion escrow fund. Maybe the MO of this president is, like Teddy Roosevelt’s, to speak softly and carry a big stick — make nice to adversaries in public and conceal his weapon until he gets them behind closed doors.
But if that’s his strategy it’s a curious one considering Obama’s great gift (on display especially during the 2008 presidential election) to stir the nation and mobilize it behind him.

Furthermore, given the unprecedented power of large corporations to call the shots in Washington aided by unlimited campaign contributions and platoons of lobbyists, surely the only way to advance the public interest these days is to rally Americans to a cause. Closed-door conference committees, back-room deals, and lame-duck sessions keep the public out. And when the public is shut out, the big guys have even more clout.

Yet hard-boiled Washington hands I talk with disagree. They point to the $80 billion back-room deal that bought off Big Pharma for health care. They claim there’s no other way to do business in Washington now because public opinion is too easily manipulated.
They say Machiavellian (more accurately, Emanuelian) deal-making behind closed doors ain’t pretty but the public can’t be counted on. The only way to get close to a carbon tax or anything else that’s good for America is to buy the bums off.
Maybe. But when the bums are paid off the public gets stuck with the tab. We’ll be paying far more for our drugs under the new health care law than otherwise because of the deal with Big Pharma.
The $20 billion deal with BP was also crafted in secret, and we have no way to know what assurrances were given the oil giant that might cost us later.
So too with the financial reform bill that’s now being finalized in conference committee, and with any potential energy bill where the real deals are made in the back room.

Remember the back-room deal that bailed out Wall Street? We still don’t have all the details but it’s clear the public was taken to the cleaners, and the titans of Wall Street are beaming through their bonuses.
Call me old fashioned but I still think democracy is better than corporatist negotiation. And when we have a president as articulate and thoughtful as the one we now have — more capable than almost any occupant of the Oval Office in modern times to educate the public about real challenges and real solutions — he and his advisors do a disservice to the American people when they make the important deals......

http://robertreich.org/post/708234827/the-obama-plot-for-a-carbon-tax
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
newthinking Donating Member (98 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 03:28 PM
Response to Original message
1. That is my concern too. For example, what is BP getting as a "Tradeoff"?
Edited on Fri Jun-18-10 03:29 PM by newthinking
No way would they have done that from political pressure alone. They are getting something out of it, like a "get out of jail free" card maybe?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 03:34 PM
Response to Original message
2. Reich is a broken record, and he's confusing himself.
It’s plausible. After all, the President has now gotten BP to agree to a $20 billion escrow fund. Maybe the MO of this president is, like Teddy Roosevelt’s, to speak softly and carry a big stick — make nice to adversaries in public and conceal his weapon until he gets them behind closed doors.

But if that’s his strategy it’s a curious one considering Obama’s great gift (on display especially during the 2008 presidential election) to stir the nation and mobilize it behind him

<...>

Call me old fashioned but I still think democracy is better than corporatist negotiation. And when we have a president as articulate and thoughtful as the one we now have — more capable than almost any occupant of the Oval Office in modern times to educate the public about real challenges and real solutions — he and his advisors do a disservice to the American people when they make the important deals in secret.


Is he saying Roosevelt's approach was corporatist?

Reich couldn't even write a positive article about the escrow fund. It's all about ridiculous implications and tired arguments: Obama is articulate.

Who gives a shit?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. you keep praising the political expediency position of Theda Skocpol--explains your distaste here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. "political expediency " How about common sense?
I never understood the position that not supporting the President and demanding that he support us will produce the desired results.

Results come via support, which includes pushing, not sitting back and demanding the President support us as if somehow your vote means you own the President. He still needs your support.

You can best believe a lot of people aren't sitting back simplistically demanding the President support them based on their vote alone. They're pushing their ideas and arguments through members of Congress. Does anyone think that Rockefeller would resist supporting climate change if the majority of his constituents were pushing him to support it?

That's the problem with the notion that a vote is all it takes, that this is all about the President, it isn't.

Reich spend all his time writing critical articles, they aren't going to do a bit of good. He isn't persuading anyone or effecting any change.

It would be one thing if his articles were encouraging people to organize, but all they are doing is reinforcing inaction and complaining.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. how about democracy, ethics, morality, and decent values?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Without common sense
people will buy into conspiracy theories regarding all those issues.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chulanowa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. Careful there, you're using big words they might not understand
Words like "understood" and "support" and "the."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donnachaidh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #2
15. mr. pot, mr. kettle is on line two.
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lamp_shade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 03:43 PM
Response to Original message
5. Poor Robert. Nobody listens to him any more. He's sounding more and more like a sore loser.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. when everyone's thrown under the bus, doesn't that tell you something?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
7. k & r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenny blankenship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
11. Obama could no more throw the book at BP than he could prosecute Tony bLiar for falsifying intel
in the run up to the Iraq War (conspiracy to commit an act of international aggression is a warcrime). In theory he could of course do both, he's free to do so, and legally he ought to. But then he'd be someone else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #11
17. so, it's not a dynamic
counterfactual, is that what you're saying?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laelth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 06:01 PM
Response to Original message
12. Hear, hear. I hate having to buy off the corporations to get something done.
It doesn't have to be that way.

:dem:

-Laelth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenny blankenship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. You "get something done" only to find
that something happens to be the thing they wanted the whole time, not what you wanted. You get co-opted and shafted, and pay for the privilege.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laelth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Exactly. That's how I feel about health insurance company enrichment. n/t
:dem:

-Laelth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 08:10 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. +100
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
16. Reich is locked on target again. I have no idea what someone would disagree with
in the broad substance of what he's saying. Why do our basic principles which used to be shared fairly universally across both parties now get a 'sit and spin' from many a Democrat?

Being amoral and seeking power for it's own sake has about ZERO chance to turn out well for the broad public.

The so called "pragmatism" is nothing but will o wind, unprincipled, amorality as a mode of operation that ignores all conditions including the actual real world for the whims of a few isolated and wealthy folk with hardly a concern for how said whims impact hundreds of millions of people.

The more this tact is pushed the more fragmentation should be expected. Not only does it not sell, it infuriates. Folks worried about a GOBP taking over should drop this vile SOP and locate some form of a moral compass and work for the good of the American people unabashedly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. totally agree
'pragmatism' is really synonymous with 'politically expedient', at least the way we see the exerise of pragmatic decision-making; and, as you say, it's amoral, and will lead to fragmentation, as more folks see through the smoke screen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 08:17 PM
Response to Original message
20. "Transparanency in Government".....when convenient and not embarrassing. K&
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 04:45 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC