This week's National Journal poll of leading political bloggers asked, "How much damage have controversies surrounding the nominations of Tom Daschle, Timothy Geithner and William Lynn done to President Obama's image?" On the Right, the leading choice was "some", with about a quarter answering "a great deal" or "only a little." On the left, the leading choice was "only a little" (53%), while "some" got about a third.
My view: "Daschle's tax avoidance was impossible to defend as minor or just an honest mistake. It helps Obama in the long run that he will not be in the Cabinet, since he would have been a visible link between the administration and the Rangel/Dodd/Frank congressional culture of corruption. Lynn broke no law (even though his lobbying work offends the far left), and Geithner's original error really was caused by his tax software (as demonstrated by my Volokh Conspiracy colleague James Lindgren)." I think Daschle is a big setback this week, but it will eventually be forgotten--and having someone like Tennessee Governor Phil Bredesen rather than Daschle will be much better for Obama (and the country) in the long run.
The second question was: "Based on events of recent weeks, how much sway do you think President Obama will have over congressional Democrats?" On a 1-5 scale, the Left voted for 4.0, and the Right for 3.2. My vote was a tenative 4. "We don't know yet for sure if Pelosi/Obey turning the 'emergency stimulus' into a massive permanent increase in ordinary domestic spending was contrary to Obama's wishes. If so, it suggests that Obama's influence over Congress may be weak. If Obama likes what the so-called 'stimulus' has become, this suggests that the new administration might be as fiscally irresponsible as the previous one."
Political bloggers: Obama nominees missteps serious but not critical. Obama has strong but limited influence over Cong. Dems.:
Does anyone really think that that there is a split between Obama and more than a handful of naive Congressional Democrats? Most Congressional Democrats will support ANY President who allows them to payoff their financial supporters with government money. Unions, ACORN and trial lawyers are golden and the Congressmen they own are delighted with Obama.
I’m not sure how you or James can still say that given what we know about the fact that (a) Geithner was told specifically by his employer that he was responsible for paying the withholding, (b) asked for (and received) an allowance from his employer to pay the withholding and (c) signed a statement acknowledging his responsibility to make the payments and instead pocketed the extra funds from his employer.
Really going out on a limb on that one. This administration and congress look to be the most fiscally irresponsible evah, and we're less than three weeks in.
Agree with you on the first question. Daschle's conduct went way beyond the others.
"Geithner's original error really was caused by his tax software (as demonstrated by my Volokh Conspiracy colleague James Lindgren)."
I don't think that is what Professor Lindgren purported to show. His point was that Turbo Tax wouldn't have caught the error, not that it "caused" the error.
Congress: "Totally spending America back into a colony of England!"
Obama: "The Obama Meltdown heralds the effective end of his Presidency!"
Daschle: "Revealed to be Caligula in red spectacles"
Welp, that's one Administration down for the count! Nothing left to do but wait till the Six-Pack Revolution and the Joe The Plumber Ascendency of 2010!
No, his point was, assuming Geithner followed TurboTax's default dialog, that the software would have missed this item. He would have had to override the dialog and enter it manually.
The real problem is that since Obama's advisors and cabinet are still in flux and settling in, he must rely on congressional Democrats to sell a crucial piece of legislation which his presidency hinges on. This does not bode well for him. Defining moments in one's presidency should never be outsourced.
Obama successfully limited the damage done by Dashle and Lynn, but Geithner could still be a serious problem.
For your second question, I think it is still unclear. Obama will certainly be unable to roll Congress given the past few weeks. Much depends on his ability to move the public by appealing to them directly the way Reagan (the "Great Communicator") did. Right now he seems to be floundering around, but his record indicates that he still might be able to do this.
That’s an interesting argument; I honestly hadn’t considered the implications of the Secretary of the Treasury being outed as a tax “cheat” beyond the sheer offensiveness and irony of it. It has to be difficult enough to get people to voluntarily comply with the tax code when they’re concerned about their jobs and tightening their belt – knowing the guy in charge of collecting it tried to get away with not paying more than most people earn in a year while the administration that appointed him is telling us that it is our “patriotic” duty to pay more taxes, might be enough to put some people over the edge.
I suspect that the real reason that Daschle withdrew was that he and Obama knew that he couldn't rely on the base to stand by him. He could have fought on, but the left wasn't about to go to the mattresses for someone they viewed as being in the pocket of the insurance companies. That's why the New York Times' editorial wasn't much of a surprise. They tried to make it about his tax problems, but they couldn't resist mentioning his lobbying.
Chances are that the left will now get someone whom they'll actually fight for. They're wetting themselves over the prospect of Howard Dean. I'm mostly indifferent, although I don't think that experience treating disease is really a qualification for management of a federal bureaucracy.
(Yes, I know he was a governor. That certainly helps).
And yet, not one word about the superlatives used to support the "MUST!!!! PASS!!!!! NOW!!!!" bill. Not that anyone who's seen more than one post from strawmano expected anything of the sort from him.
I may start to shoehorn illegal immigration and Obama's birth certificate into most conversations as well.
I don't care who Barney Frank is sodomizing, so long as it's not the unconsenting taxpayers.
If you have a comment about spelling, typos, or format errors, please e-mail the poster directly rather than posting a comment.
Comment Policy: We reserve the right to edit or delete comments, and in extreme cases to ban commenters, at our discretion. Comments must be relevant and civil (and, especially, free of name-calling). We think of comment threads like dinner parties at our homes. If you make the party unpleasant for us or for others, we'd rather you went elsewhere. We're happy to see a wide range of viewpoints, but we want all of them to be expressed as politely as possible.
We realize that such a comment policy can never be evenly enforced, because we can't possibly monitor every comment equally well. Hundreds of comments are posted every day here, and we don't read them all. Those we read, we read with different degrees of attention, and in different moods. We try to be fair, but we make no promises.
And remember, it's a big Internet. If you think we were mistaken in removing your post (or, in extreme cases, in removing you) -- or if you prefer a more free-for-all approach -- there are surely plenty of ways you can still get your views out.