Why Obama is no FDR (Klein in WaPo)

[Recursion]

Interesting post by Ezra referencing a new book by Michael Hiltzik on the New Deal.

I like that the monetary side of the New Deal is getting some attention again; I think our focus on its fiscal side can be very misleading.

...

But for political scientists and historians of the Great Depression, the agonies and ecstasies of both sides are a continual annoyance — an example of how the past and the present are distorted by America’s fixation on the president and inattention to almost everything else in the political system.

...

Franklin D. Roosevelt won the presidency in 1932, three years into the Great Depression. The unemployment rate that year was 23.6 percent. Obama won the presidency in 2008, mere months into the financial crisis; unemployment was at 6.8 percent. Consequently, the two presidents faced political systems prepared to do very different things.

...

Take the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., which ended traditional bank runs by insuring commercial bank deposits. FDR opposed it. He believed that “the weak banks will pull down the strong.” But senators from rural states represented those small, weak banks. Deposit insurance was part of the price they exacted to pass the Glass-Steagall banking law. “You will have to come to a deposit guarantee eventually, Cap’n,” Roosevelt’s vice president, John Nance Garner, told him. He did — but only because Congress forced him into it.

This happened again and again throughout the New Deal. FDR wanted to go far. But Congress often wanted to go further — occasionally over the president’s objections. To pass his farm bill, Hiltzik writes, Roosevelt had to accept “an amendment sponsored by Senator Elmer Thomas of Oklahoma authorizing the President to inflate the dollar by coining silver, printing money (creating a devalued class of currency known as “greenbacks”), deliberately devaluing the dollar by reducing its gold content, or . . . undertaking any inflationary method he chose.”

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

1. But he does a good Ben Nelson.

:patriot:

[TheWraith]

3. Did you read the article, or just the headline?

The premise of the article is explaining WHY Obama's reforms are less dramatic, not bashing him for it.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

4. Is Ben Nelson a bash?

He's a Democrat.

:shrug:

[Recursion]

5. Oddly enough, his last opponent was Hagel, whom I kind of like

So my normal "he's a damn sight better than the Republican" isn't as true as usual.

[TheWraith]

2. FDR had a mostly compliant Congress with overwhelming Democratic majorities.

When the Social Security Act was signed into law, the majority in the Senate was 69 Democrats to 25 Republicans.

Not to mention FDR had an opposition which actually acknowledged that something had to be done.

[TheKentuckian]

7. Excuses are for when you have tried and failed, they ring ever hollow for those who fail to try.

We have many grave problems and nary a solution to the scale of them and too damn often we see a failure to acknowledge problems and/or counter-productive and/or pro-establishment answers.

[TheWraith]

11. You seem unfamiliar with the many things Obama has accomplished...

...and the many more things that have been attempted only to be blocked by Republicans.

http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/

[dennis4868]

12. exactly....

but most people here at DU don't understand that....I really think many DUers believe that Obama is a king and can fuck you congress I am going to do what I want and will ignore your fillubusters and because he does not do that they get on him....so what you say is RIGHT ON POINT...can't compare FDR to Obama....FDR had supermajorities in congress and an opposition party that was not acting in bad faith...BUT THIS MEANS NOTHING TO MANY HERE....

[Myrina]

6. Nov 2008 was not 'mere months' into the financial crisis ...

... it'd been building since about 2006. Or 1980, if you seriously look at our economic policies.

[BlueIris]

9. So true. 1980 was the real turning point. nt

[msongs]

8. "I welcome their hatred" vs tell me how much to cave and I will nt

[Recursion]

14. "I welcome their hatred" was in FDR's re-election campaign. I expect something similar in BHO's (nt)

[Number23]

10. Rec'd for this passage alone...

But for political scientists and historians of the Great Depression, the agonies and ecstasies of both sides are a continual annoyance — an example of how the past and the present are distorted by America’s fixation on the president and inattention to almost everything else in the political system.

God, ain't THAT the truth...

I read this yesterday and was hoping someone would post it here.

[girl gone mad]

13. There would be no point in trying to emulate monetary policy from that era.

We aren't on a gold standard anymore.

[Recursion]

15. Nor the fiscal policy, but monetary policy is important

I don't think NGDP targeting is a panacea, but it could be a mostly-acea.

[girl gone mad]

18. Monetary intervention is utterly useless at this point.

How many ways does it need to fail for people to get the message?

We need fiscal solutions, now.

[Romulox]

16. I wonder if voters will be impressed with hyperlinked lists + a bunch of excuses, come November?

:silly: :hi:

[Recursion]

17. I've never done the Blue Wall of Hope, Romu

And I think it's unfair if you're saying that's what this is.

And actually I agree with you on this: voters judge Presidents by their accomplishments because the public fixates too much on the President as opposed to the Congress.

Sometimes I think we should re-empower the Electoral College so we're not stuck watching a sycophantic demagogic dog and pony show 25% of the time.