Translation

.يولد جميع الناس أحرارا متساوين في الكرامة والحقوق. وقد وهبوا عقلا وضميرا وعليهم أن يعامل بعضهم بعضا بروح الإخاء‎
FoxLingo German Spanish French Arabic Czech Greek Hungarian Italian Polish Portuguese Romanian Russian Serbian Slovenian Thai Turkish

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

Why Bush is no Hoover (but Worse!): Unprecendented Do-Nothingness in a President’s Final Days

There have been a number of comparisons of late between FDR and Barack Obama and between Herbert Hoover and George W. Bush. But those comparisons are unfair. Obama may yet turn out to be another Roosevelt, but “W.” is no Hoover, he’s worse.

This is true in part because Hoover’s actions during the 1932-33 presidential transition are often underrated but also because W.’s complete and total abdication of responsibility for leadership in his last few months in office is largely unprecedented.

No president on his way out of office has been as laconic in the face of crisis as is our current president. At the end of his presidency James Buchanan labored mightily (albeit unsuccessfully) to hold the Union together. Truman frantically tried to end the Korean War in his last few months in office as did Lyndon Johnson in trying to end the war in Vietnam.

Grant ordered troops to guard the polls and supervise vote tabulation in three southern states while a congressional commission tried to sort out the mess that was the election of 1876. As it turned out the election wasn’t decided until March 2, 1877, two days before the inauguration, in favor of the Republican Rutherford B. Hayes. Democrats were so angry and the threat of insurrection so real, that Grant quietly began to beef up the military’s presence in Washington D.C. to fend off a threatened attack on the Capitol.

Even after he lost the election of 1932, Herbert Hoover strove mightily to stem the tide of economic collapse. Hoover, in fact, adopted many of the reforms that were later to become the cornerstone of the New Deal. He chartered the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, designed to prevent banks from going belly up. He had already adopted Keynesian economics by trying to stimulate the economy by running up a huge Federal deficit (mainly by cutting taxes). Hoover founded the Federal Home Loan Bank to prevent home foreclosures. He even encouraged public works projects through the RFC and through the Emergency Relief and Construction Act (both efforts were continued byRoosevelt in the New Deal).

By the time Roosevelt became president many states had already declared bank holidays. In fact, a number of holdovers from the Hoover Department of the Treasury stayed on an extra couple of months to help Roosevelt draft the earliest financial reforms passed by Congress in the new president’s first 100 days.

Roosevelt, for his part, was almost completely uncooperative with Hoover during the transition. Hoover believed that Roosevelt was intentionally trying to tank the economy in order to discredit Hoover and burnish, by contrast, the image of the new administration. Roosevelt believed that Hoover was trying to lock him into policies (many of which FDR ultimately adopted) that would limit his actions after he became president.

None of this seems to be going on in the current transition. Of course, the current crisis isn’t of the magnitude of the Great Depression, yet. And the Bush Administration has supported one of the largest corporate bailouts in history.

But there is a curious lack of thought or follow through in its efforts. AIG is still reeling and there is no direction or form in the Treasury’s handling of the $750 billion in funds that was originally allocated to buy up toxic mortgages from lenders. But now the plan is just to give money to the lenders and hope they will lend it to businesses and consumers (which they aren’t).

Throughout this crisis the President has been largely absent. But leaving the job to an outgoing Treasury Secretary or an incoming president isn’t enough. In the sixty or so days before the Inauguration a lot can go wrong and Bush isn’t trying to prevent it.

That’s why Bush is no Hoover, he’s worse.

* * *

Daniel Franklin

Wednesday, November 5, 2008

Obama wins historic US election

Obama supporters in optimistic mood

Democratic Senator Barack Obama has been elected the first black president of the United States, according to projected results.

There were scenes of delight at a park in Chicago where tens of thousands of Obama supporters had gathered.

Mr Obama is expected to address the crowd soon.

His rival John McCain accepted defeat, saying "I deeply admire and commend" Mr Obama. He called on his supporters to lend the next president their goodwill.

Mr Obama captured the key battleground states of Pennsylvania and Ohio, before passing the essential figure of 270 electoral college votes at 0400 GMT, when projections showed he had also taken California and a slew of other states.

He has so far held most of the states that voted Democrat in 2004, as well as seizing at least six from the Republicans, including Florida and Virginia.

Several other key swing states are hanging in the balance.

In Indiana and North Carolina, with most of the vote counted, there was less than 0.5% between the two candidates.

However, the popular vote remains close. At 0345 GMT it stood at 50.7% for the Democratic Senator from Illinois, against 48.2% for Arizona Senator McCain.

The main developments include:

  • Mr Obama is projected to have seized Ohio, New Mexico, Iowa and Virginia - all Republican wins in 2004.
  • He is also projected to have won: Vermont, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Delaware, Massachusetts, District of Columbia, Maryland, Connecticut, Maine, New Jersey, Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, New York, Rhode Island.
  • Mr McCain is projected to have won: Kentucky, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Arkansas, Alabama, Kansas, North Dakota, Wyoming, Georgia, Louisiana, West Virginia, Texas, Mississippi, Utah.
  • Turnout was reported to be extremely high - in some places "unprecedented".
  • The Democrats made early gains in the Senate race, seizing seats from the Republicans in Virginia, North Carolina, New Hampshire and New Mexico.
  • Exit polls suggest the economy was the major deciding factor for six out of 10 voters.
  • Nine out of 10 said the candidates' race was not important to their vote, the Associated Press reported. Almost as many said age did not matter.

Several states reported a high turnout. It was predicted 130 million Americans, or more, would vote - more than for any election since 1960.

Many Americans said they felt they were voting in a historic election, not least because of the possibility of choosing the first African-American president.

Faton Fall, 40, a black voter queuing at a Baptist church in Chicago, said: "It means a lot to me. I'm overwhelmed. I can't say more."

Congressional race

There are also elections to renew the entire US House of Representatives and a third of US Senate seats.

Democrats are expected to expand majorities in both chambers.

They need to gain nine Senate seats to reach a 60-seat majority that would give them extra legislative power.

In the presidential vote, under the US Electoral College system, states are allocated votes based on their representation in Congress.

In almost every state, the winner gets all these college votes.

To become president, a candidate needs to win a majority across the country - 270 college votes out of a possible 538.

The presidential election has been the most expensive in US history - costing $2.4bn, according to the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics.