FedUpUSA

New Book: ‘Confidence Men’ Exposes White House Economic Team

The White House is clamoring to shoot down claims made in a new book by Pulitzer  Prize-winning author Ron Suskind, which offers stinging insight into the Obama  administration’s dysfunctional handling of the economic crisis.

Confidence Men, released Tuesday, is an exposé on the bitter  rivalries that divided and, at times, paralyzed Obama’s economic team. It paints  an unflattering portrait of an inexperienced president who lacks the leadership  skills to get his staff in line.

The criticism couldn’t have come at a worse time for Obama. Already under  increased scrutiny about the administration’s economic policies and the  president’s ability to lead, White House officials are pushing back hard against  Suskind’s book. In a media blitz this week, administration officials have listed  over a half-dozen minor inconsistencies, factual errors, and spelling  mistakes.

Treasury Secretary Tim  Geithner even provided an on-camera denial to one of the book’s more  shocking claims, and Press Secretary Jay Carney went so far as to accuse Suskind  of “lifting” a passage in his book from Wikipedia.

Suskind is standing by his book, telling talk show hosts and reporters that  the administration is getting defensive because they are worried by some of his  revelations.

After reading the book, it’s easy to see why. There are a more than a few  allegations in the book that should have the White House nervous.

Obama is a terrible manager

Suskind makes the case that Obama picked the wrong  people to guide his administration’s economic policy. The team, anchored by  Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and National Economic Council director Larry  Summers, was rife with acrimony and divisions.

At one point, Obama’s friend U.S. Sen. Byron Dorgan (D) warned the  president-elect: “You’ve picked the wrong people. I don’t understand how you  could do this! You’ve picked the wrong people!”

But as the team broke down after a series of bad decisions, Obama failed to  nip the problem in the bud. Instead, he let himself be lectured and dictated to,  particularly by Summers, who formed an early alliance with Chief of Staff Rahm  Emanuel. In this leadership void, members of his economic staff — including  Council of Economic Advisors chair Cristina Romer and budget director Peter  Orzag — quickly became more concerned with one-upping one another than with  guiding the country out of the financial crisis.

The whole economic team knew the stimulus was doomed to  fail

Passed within a month of Obama’s  inauguration, the stimulus bill was not a grand policy proposal, but a  “hodgepodge,” of competing and unresolved ideas being bounced around by the  President’s new economic team. The administration saw a hole in the economy and  wanted to fill it as quickly as possible, without much thought as to how the  money was being spent.Conventional wisdom now holds that the stimulus wasn’t big enough — states  used the money to plug holes in their budgets and tax breaks went to pay down  debt. Obama admitted as much in 2010, but economists were sounding the alarm  long before the bill passed.

Suskind’s revelations are particularly salient because not  much has changed in the Obama administration on this point. The White House  is still yielding to deficit hawks while struggling to make a case for stimulus  spending.

But Paul Krugman was the voice inside Obama’s head

But Paul Krugman was the voice inside Obama's head

New  York Timescolumnist Paul Krugman, a Nobel Prize-winning economist and  Summers’ rival, was an early and vocal critic of Obama’s stimulus plan.Although he was shunned from the president’s economic policy staff, Suskind  writes that Krugman occupied an important place in Obama’s deliberations about  the recovery.

“Each morning at the economic briefing it was like we were debating Krugman,”  an aide told Suskind. “Clearly Obama was reading Paul’s columns and related on  materials…and it made sense to him as both analysis and a guide for  action.”

Larry Summers hijacked the administration’s economic  policy — and the White House let him

Larry Summers hijacked the administration's economic policy — and the White House let him

According  to Suskind’s account, Summers sweet-talked his way into the President’s inner  economic circle, but considered the NEC job beneath him. So he added conditions:  He would be the gatekeeper for all economic matters that went to the Oval  Office. Obama accepted, against the counsel of some of his closest advisors.The system drove Obama’s other economic advisors crazy — they found that when  Summers disagreed with their view it somehow never made it to the president. In  one account, after Orzag submitted a report directly to the president — at  Obama’s request — Summers stormed into Orzag’s office yelling “What you’ve done  is IMMORAL!”

By the end of 2009, Summers was trying to exercise control over even broader  areas of domestic policy, demanding “content control” for all information on  environmental/energy, tax policy, and healthcare.

But when Orzag complained to Emanuel, Rahm asked him to “help him out” and  understand how difficult it was to manage Summers.

And then totally lost it after Obama reappointed Ben  Bernanke

And then totally lost it after Obama reappointed Ben Bernanke

Another  condition of Summers accepting the NEC job was that he would be first in line to  replace Bernanke as Chairman of the Federal Reserve.So when Obama decided to reappoint Bernanke, Summers was outraged. He made a  list of demands, including a round of golf with Obama, the right to walk with  the Cabinet at major events like the State of the Union, and a car and driver.  The White House acquiesced to everything except the car and driver, but Summers  insisted so Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina was forced to try and track one  down — evidence of how far the administration was willing to go to appease  Summers.

It wasn’t until Obama’s even-keeled senior advisor Pete Rouse wrote a memo in  January 2010 arguing for Summers’ removal that the White House even considered  replacing its NEC chair.

Tim Geithner went behind everybody’s back to save the  banks

The major rift within the economic team developed over  whether the federal government should restructure the major investment banks,  which Summers and Romer supported. Geithner, Wall Street’s “Man in Washington,”  however, opposed a restructuring and favored bank “stress tests.”Obama ultimately settled for a compromise, authorizing the stress tests and  ordering Geithner to come up with a plan to restructure Citi. According to  Suskind, Geithner simply ignored that order and never came up with a plan.

As the last guy standing from Obama’s original economic team, Geithner is the  only one whose job is potentially threatened by Confidence Men (by Suskind’s  account, it’s a miracle he still has his job in the first place). But the White  House has vehemently denied the claims, and paraded Geithner in front of the  press corps this week to disavow them in person.

The White House has a SERIOUS women problem

The White House has a SERIOUS women problem

According  to the book, top female staffers were marginalized by the boy’s club mentality  of the Obama White House. “Looking back, this place would be in court for a  hostile workplace,” former communications director Anita Dunn told Suskind.  “Because it actually fit all of the classic legal requirements for a genuinely  hostile workplace to women.”As the only woman on the economic team, Romer disproportionately bore the  brunt of this hostility. Staffers said Summers often tried to humiliate Romer in  morning briefings — it got so bad that Obama senior advisor Valerie Jarrett had  to call meetings for female staffers to air their grievances.

The President was not only complicit, but also responsible for the problem,  Suskind notes. During one meeting with a group of economists, Romer wrote a note  to Summers: “Either he acknowledges me, or I’m leaving.”

It took Obama seven months to realize he needed to fire  Rahm

It took Obama seven months to realize he needed to fire Rahm

A  year into Obama’s presidency, Pete Rouse, his senior advisor, drafted the first  of several memos asserting that then-Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel was ineffective  at his job.Legendary for his temper, but also for his disorganization, Emanuel was often  the one instigating the fights that dominated the West Wing and distracted Obama  from governing.

That February, Emanuel made headlines in a column by Dana Milbank asserting  that Obama should have paid more attention to his Chief of Staff — an article  that had Obama livid.

But even so, it took Obama until September to finally show Emanuel the door — and even then it was on Emanuel’s own terms.

In short, Obama is a REALLY terrible manager

In short, Obama is a REALLY terrible manager

Obama  allowed himself to be pushed around by his subordinates — Summers and Geithner  in particular — and drawn into long policy debates instead of focusing on policy  questions.”The decision he had made in November to  choose Geithner and Summers, and his penchant for wanting to convince his  advisers of his rightness prior to making a major decision, all but guaranteed  that any such market intervention would place him in a position of having to  out-debate much of his senior staff,” Suskind writes.

Summers put it best, telling Peter Orzag: “You know  Peter, we’re really home alone. I mean it…We’re home alone. There’s no adult in  charge. Clinton would never have made these mistakes.”

Obama all-but-admitted to Suskind that he didn’t focus  on the big picture for much of his first year, saying: “Carter, Clinton, and I  all have sort of the disease of being policy wonks… I think that if you get  too consumed with that you lose sight of the larger issue.”

Not much has changed — Obama hasn’t had a message since  2008

Not much has changed — Obama hasn't had a message since 2008

Image: The White House

After Democrats lost Sen. Ted  Kennedy’s seat to Scott Brown in January 2010, Obama asked his senior staff  “What is my narrative? I don’t have a narrative.”As one staffer in the room told Suskind, “He was right. He had no narrative.  No story. For someone like Obama, that’s like saying I don’t know who I am. That  I’ve lost my way.”

Throughout the book Obama is seen searching to fulfill — and failing to meet — many of the promises and expectations of his presidential campaign. Buried in  policy debates, internal discord, and partisan squabbles with Congress, Obama  lost the inspirational quality that defined his ascendance to the White House — a challenge that continues to this day.

Now meet the author

 

The Business Insider

Share

Comments

comments