creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Lawrence Kudlow
Lawrence Kudlow
18 May 2013
Special Counsel Is the Only Way to Clean up the IRS Rat's Nest

When you get right down to it, the political targeting and stalling of tax-exempt applications by the IRS was … Read More.

11 May 2013
Immigration Reform Is Pro-Growth

At the end of the day, the battle over immigration reform is not about dollars and cents. It's about the soul … Read More.

3 May 2013
April Jobs Aside, We're Falling Behind

The really good news from April's employment report is that all the pessimistic, end-of-the-world, spring-… Read More.

Geithner Goes Over the Edge

Comment

Is Tim Geithner the most politically partisan treasury secretary in history? Certainly sounds like it these days. As the government's chief financial officer, he's spending a lot of time firing campaign barbs at various Republicans and their policies.

Geithner has blasted Mitt Romney by name on several occasions. He frequently attacks Rep. Paul Ryan and the GOP budget. And he recently fired a broadside at top Romney economist Glenn Hubbard, who is presently dean of the Columbia Business School.

Responding to a Hubbard op-ed in The Wall Street Journal — which calculated that the president's spending plans would require an 11 percent tax increase on people earning less than $200,000 a year — Geithner said, "That's a completely made-up, remarkably hackish observation for an economist."

Hubbard a hack?

Besides running a highly respected Ivy League business school, he was the chairman of President George W. Bush's council of economic advisors. He also earned his Ph.D. in economics from Harvard.

But Hubbard is advising Romney, and before that he counseled Bush, so the very political Geithner blasted him as a hack.

By the way, all Hubbard did was calculate that even after all of Obama's proposed tax hikes on millionaires, investors and upper-end business people, revenues would rise by about $150 billion a year. But Obama's budget schedules spending to rise by $500 billion a year. So Hubbard concluded that an across-the-board tax hike of 11 percent for everybody — including below-$200,000 earners — would be required.

You can disagree with Hubbard's point, but the arithmetic gap between spending and revenues per year is unmistakable. It's not a hackish statement. It's merely an informed opinion.

And let's face it: A condescending put down by Mr. Geithner is a political statement.

Now let me pause here. I know Tim Geithner personally, and I like him. Always have. While I disagree with him on many issues, we have good relations. But treasury secretaries are not supposed to be political partisans. That does not come with the territory.

The statesmen-like, high-office Cabinet departments like defense, state and treasury are typically managed in relatively nonpartisan ways simply because the nation's finances and security require bipartisan efforts. Policy disagreements? Yes.

Name-calling? No. I would add the Justice Department, but unfortunately Eric Holder has been incredibly partisan on Fast and Furious and other issues.

But to go back to Tim Geithner, he's going to have to negotiate another debt-ceiling bill at the end of the year, and he's going to need Republican support to get it done. The same is true for the coming tax cliff, where all the Bush-era tax cuts expire. Geithner will need Republican support there, too.

And on matters like the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the dollar and other international financial issues, there may be policy differences, but treasury secretaries are supposed to work with both sides of the aisle.

You could think back to Republican treasury man Hank Paulson during the financial meltdown. He desperately sought bipartisan support. You can even go way back to Republican James Baker, who was a tough political fighter as Ronald Reagan's first-term chief of staff. But when Baker became treasury secretary, he took his political hat off and negotiated a bipartisan tax-reform bill. And I don't recall Bill Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin blasting Republicans by name.

The point is, my friend Tim Geithner has gone over the edge, and he oughta pull back. Let President Obama and his campaign team handle the politics. That's the way it works. The Treasury Department is not supposed to be a campaign arm. The U.S. has enormous financial vulnerabilities. And it seems to me that Geithner could use all the help he can get, even while he pushes the administration's policy agenda.

Name-calling and direct insults won't do it.

Meanwhile, on the economy, a little humility is in order. The latest gross domestic product report came in at a disappointing 2.2 percent, about a half-point below expectations and weaker than the 3 percent fourth-quarter number. There may be an economic stall that will also stall President Obama's re-election.

Weekly jobless claims in April are running 20,000 ahead of March. That might mean next week's employment report will be another disappointment. And over the 11 quarters of the Obama recovery, real GDP has averaged only 2.4 percent. Compare that to the postwar average of 4.5 percent, and the tax-cutting Reagan recovery of 6.1 percent.

So when Mitt Romney says, "It's still about the economy, and we're not stupid," he's got a powerful point. But it's a point that needs to be answered by President Obama, not his treasury man.

The rich tradition of American government history teaches that the head of the venerable old Treasury Department should not be the campaigner in chief.

To find out more about Lawrence Kudlow and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2012 CREATORS.COM



Comments

3 Comments | Post Comment
Sir; do you think that was not a hackish observation by Mr.Hubbard??? I do, because the presumptions of it are obvious... It presumes that only the poor and middle class will bear the burden of a debt run up for war and to save the economy that is rapidly loosing the domestic depth to support it; and it assumes that democrats can play funny with the money the way that republicans and democrats have always done... Captialism is not like Communism that actually has to work and pay its debts... With capitalism there is always jam tomorrow and pie in the sky, and if you cannot afford it now, there is an installment plan...A capitalist economy is 90% hope, and 10% trust, and in attacking the administration on the basis of hack assumptions, Mr. Hubbard is attacking both hope and trust... People have to trust to take out loans, and promise their hard work and risk their equity...To offer loans one must be able to trust the stability of the market and the ability of one to repay... All of these are called into question by an economy so much overseas, and so overextended and credit dependent that it has reached the tipping point... Mr. Hubbard is attacking the ability much hamstrung by the republican house, to respond to crisis with flexible monetary policy and pump priming... He judges on the basis of a static economy as no one since Adam Smith has done... He should know better, and if economy is a science as has never been proved, then Mr. Hubbard is mad... But, to win the game, republican are willing to risk destruction...Thanks...Sweeney
Comment: #1
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:04 AM
Lawrence said:
Re: Hubbard,

Besides running a highly respected Ivy League business school, he was the chairman of President George W. Bush's council of economic advisors. He also earned his Ph.D. in economics from Harvard.

Well, I didn't know about this gentleman before reading your article, but if he was responsible for the Bush economy, the smart bet would be that he should be in an uncharted jungle in Peru, or on an isolated island in the Seychelles, hiding out for the rest of his life. Bush is responsible for more economic misery, for my generation than, than, ...........I can't think of anyone worse. If Hubbard's degree is from Harvard, I might suggest we find out who sat in for his exams, and wrote his thesis, a conviction would be in order.

Lousy reference to prove your point Lawrence, sort of like nominating Hitler, Stalin, or Papa Doc for the Nobel Peace Prize. Your article is worthless.

Of equal alarm, I read today that Mitt is bringing on board the foreign policy advisors of Papa Bush, who are already saber rattling against Russia, and half of the Globe, Yeah Mitt, we need another war like Cheney needs another rectum, how much money has the defense industry, AKA war mongers, has or will donate to Mitt's campaign?
Didn't Chaney and his buddies make enough off of the middle east wars they got us into already?

"Conservative" Mantra: It's 1950 and the cold war is ON
Comment: #2
Posted by: Bloom Hilda
Sun Apr 29, 2012 3:52 PM
Re: Bloom Hilda;...Ya, Bloom, No one is held accountable, but if you tell them what they want to hear they do promote you...Thanks..Sweeney
Comment: #3
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Mon Apr 30, 2012 4:23 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Lawrence Kudlow
May. `13
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
28 29 30 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31 1
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Jamie Stiehm
Jamie StiehmUpdated 24 May 2013
Scott Rasmussen
Scott RasmussenUpdated 24 May 2013
Suzanne Fields
Suzanne FieldsUpdated 24 May 2013

21 Feb 2013 The Pro-growth Sequester

24 Oct 2008 Reagan + Friedman + Keynes: We Need All the Help We Can Get.

22 Jan 2011 GE's Immelt on the Hot Seat