Culture11 asked some of us what's the first thing President Obama should do. In the symposium, I suggest that he'd be smart to go hammer and tongs after corporate kingpins who drove their banks and companies off a cliff -- and if he finds criminal fraud there, make examples of them. Excerpt:
Last week, Keysha Cooper, a senior mortgage underwriter for Washington Mutual, told The New York Times that she was forced by her superiors to approve loans she knew to be ultra-risky, even likely fradulent. WaMu went belly up in September in what, at over $300 billion, was by far the largest bank failure in US history. Kerry K. Killinger, the WaMu CEO who led the savings and loan off the cliff, got a golden parachute worth an estimated $17 million. Many shareholders were wiped out, and the US taxpayer, through the FDIC, is left covering eligible losses.If the Kerry Killingers of corporate America so much as jaywalked on the job, President Obama's Justice Department should make an example of as many of them as is feasible. Perp walks, prisons, heavy fines - get medieval on 'em. (Perhaps there is a room with a waterboard at Club Gitmo?). It won't bring back the money these cretins lost, but aside from being just, it would have the politically salubrious effect of showing the public that those architects of our economic misery did not profit from their crimes.
As I explain, there is a politically useful effect in this -- as Kynaston recently wrote about Britain under austerity, people are willing to accept harder times without violent protest if they believe that the burden is being borne equally. Publicly punishing high-profile malefactors would be helpful in keeping people's faith in the system.
UPDATE: What's not clear from this excerpt, but is clear from my entire essay, is that I'm not in favor of criminalizing stupidity -- but if laws against criminal fraud were broken by any of these guys, hang 'em high. I would hope that he would go after the Fannie and Freddie bigs as well -- and if he doesn't, while at the same time going after Lehman, WaMu and other bigs, well, he'll deserve a blast of criticism himself.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Julie
Obama has also had the 100 hours a year for $4,000 credit for tuition. I have been a major Obama supporter; however, I do not think 100 hours is enough time for $4,000. Maybe if it is tied to the community service requirement starting in middle school.
It's not intended to be 'payment', paying someone 40 dollars an hour for 'community service' work that often consists of people wandering around a park and picking up trash would be rather silly.
It's intended as a scholarship, one awarded for helping the community. Like when you write an essay for a scholarship, they aren't paying you for the work that went into the essay! :)
Incidentally, the 'requirement' of middle school work is not exactly that. What Obama wants to do is reward schools that require or even just encourage community service. He's not going to step in and change graduation requirements. I've already heard some misinformed people think he's going to stat dictating to schools stuff like that. No, he's going to say 'You get this grant if your students do X hours of community service', leaving it up to schools if it's mandated or volunteer or, heck, punishment, and what counts as 'community service'.
"I've already heard some misinformed people think he's going to stat dictating to schools stuff like that. No, he's going to say 'You get this grant if your students do X hours of community service', leaving it up to schools if it's mandated or volunteer or, heck, punishment, and what counts as 'community service'."
So, kind of like No Child Left Behind did with state-established standardized testing benchmarks? How's that been working out? :)
It's the standard dilemma: if you mandate a strict regime, then ignore all the particularities that will make the program easier on some schools and harder on others, leading to an unfair distribution of benefits. If you let people make up their own rules, they'll simply game the system to their own advantage.
The other alternative is to just do nothing at all and let people work stuff out for themselves. But that's just not the Federal way.
So, kind of like No Child Left Behind did with state-established standardized testing benchmarks? How's that been working out? :)
NCLB punished schools for things, many of which were outside their control. Obama's plan rewards schools.
But, yeah, you're right. At some point, funding schools based on how 'good' they are is counter-productive, because many poorly-performing schools need money a lot more than ones that are doing well...that is why they poorly performing.
We'll see how well this works out in practice. It's really just a vague plan at this point. It might devolve to the individual scholarship idea, which I think everyone likes. (Essentially turn free federal grants into federal grants you earn.)
Rod, you're a babe in the woods. Obamessiah is in bed with bad people from the bankrupt GSE's and he took at least 22 million from Wall St.(refer to the LA Times last month)
Sure, they might have Mozillo do a perp walk just for show, but in the end Obama is every bit as owned as the rest of them. He didn't raise that record amount of money only from 20 dollar citizen donations. You can bet that he's already thinking about 2012, so he isn't likely to alienate the big money men, no matter what he said prior to the election.
You can rest assured that Obama was vetted by Wall St., the CFR, AIPAC, etc.
"Change?"
Don't hold your breath.
Obama voted for the trillion dollar Wall St. Christmas bonus package,
(as did McCain)
It's telling that Obama's first hire is a super partisan with neocon tendencies.
And the first press conference, picking a fight with Iran, was a clear signal to Israel that Obama will not forget who gave him the job.
Once again I will mention for those of you who are too stupid to see beyond partisan politics...there is only one party in Washington; the party of money.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.