Since last spring, Obama has been locked inside of a budget negotiation with House Republicans. And it continues even after the election. Obama's budget director tried to explain all the nooks and crannies behind all the budgets problems. However, Obama felt overwhelmed by the great deal of numbers and left all the budget responsibilities to Jacob Lew.
Now, Jacob Lew has a greater role in the America's budget. Mr. Lew now has to guide the White House in making negotiations with Congressional Republicans as a whole. The big thing is how America plans on its tax increases and spending cuts by January 1 of next year. But the negotiations will define Mr. Lew and President Obama's mark in history. If they're able to work over the aisle they will be known as two men able to create a new budget deal. If not, it could be a stain in the President's reputation.
Back in 2011, Mr. Lew had talks with Republicans about the debt ceiling. However most of the Republicans painted him as non-compromising person. They feel like the Republican constituents (Big business) would be getting squeezed by the proposed plan. Even in the recent days, there has been no progress with Mr. Lew and the Republicans.
From what it seems, this could be a big problem in the Obama administration. Though Mr. Lew is well-educated in economic policy, it seems as the G.O.P. will not buy anything he says. As the year closes, Mr. Lew tries to make more compromising plans with G.O.P. It seems that there might be some negotiation, but to reach the January 1 deadline, there is only one month left.
I'm curious to see if Obama will do anything and intervene on Mr. Lew's policy plans. Obama did say he trusts Mr. Lew, but to have a big "blotch" at the beginning of his second term would not serve him well. Will this end up being a big problem for Democrats (which could ultimately lead to a big sway of voters in the 2016 election) or a big upheaval which will paint Obama in a brilliant light? Mr. Lew and Obama will have to work hand in hand to make something happen.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
It seems like some form of compromise on Obama and Lew's part will be necessary--if Republican objection prevents progress on the budget, that budget plan must be modified (at least a little) to actually aid their interests as well. Although Democrats may object to this, it could potentially allow for Obama to make needed changes, which could "paint [him] in a brilliant light". Working across the isle seems key to me, and anyone who is capable of doing so is both an asset to their party and deserving of respect.
Well this is quite the all or nothing scenario. If Lew and Obama do not make the sacrifices necessary to gain the support of congressional republicans, there will be no significant amount of change in America's budget management. Compromise is the key in all of this, I agree with Shannon in that the plan must be modified to accommodate the G.O.P. While Lew might be trustworthy, I similarly am curious whether Obama will eventually make interventions.
I agree with Shannon that anyone willing to and working across the isle is worthy of respect. Considering the amount of attention the financial crisis has gained, I believe this proposal will be a big hit or miss for the Obama administration. Should the economy go south again, I would assume that similar to Bush, people would grow tired of 8 years of Obama and vote conservatively. Should Obama come to some sort of a compromise with Republicans, he would be able to actually live up to his promises. I am equally curious whether Obama will make interventions. Coming off a close reelection, I am extremely surprised that Obama is giving such a big proposal to Lew and staying hands off. At one point or another I think Obama will need to intervene. As we've learned, in a compromise both parties need to feel like they're winning. I think Obama will need to add a few Republican friendly pieces of legislature to get the proposal passed.
I don't quite understand why each side is failing to compromise. I know that it is hard and whatnot, but by not compromising, the situation remains stagnant. This means that each side is willing to deal with what the state of economy is now, which is obviously not working out too well. One side needs to accept some form of change, because mostly anything would be better than things are now. I don't really know what that would take, but it would most likely involve more moderate ideas on both sides of the spectrum.
Post a Comment