You are viewing the NationofChange archives. For the latest news and actions, visit the new
Get Email Updates | Log In | Register

Article image
Robert Scheer
Truthdig / Truthdig Op-Ed
Published: Saturday 12 January 2013
Lew’s myopic view of the origins of the economic meltdown, at odds even with Greenspan’s own admission of culpability, hardly qualifies him for the top economic position in the Obama administration.

The Inconvenient Truth About Jack Lew

Article image

I suppose that he can’t be much worse than Timothy Geithner, but that should be scant cause for cheer over the news that the president has nominated Jack Lew as Treasury secretary. Both championed the financial deregulation craze of the Clinton administration, and both are acolytes of Robert Rubin, the former Clinton Treasury secretary who unfettered Wall Street greed and then took his own considerable cut of the action. 

Rubin went to work at Citigroup, the world’s largest financial conglomerate whose legality was enabled by legislation he advanced while in government. He made off with a salary of $15 million a year during his decade at that bank, which specialized in toxic mortgage derivatives and had to be bailed out by taxpayers to avoid bankruptcy. 

Lew’s association with Citigroup was a far briefer and less rewarding three-year stint, but then the alternative investments unit of which he was chief operating officer in 2008 didn’t do so well with its hedge fund and private equity investments. As Jia Lynn Yang points out in The Washington Post, “Massive losses in that unit helped drive Citigroup into the arms of the federal government, which bailed out the bank with $45 billion in taxpayer money that year.”

But the taxpayer bailout did not interfere with Lew raking in more than $2 million in salary and bonuses in 2008, despite his unit’s glaring failures. Nor did he seem to learn much from the experience as to the need for restoring the sensible government regulation of the financial industry that President Franklin Roosevelt had instituted to prevent another Great Depression and the Clinton administration had destroyed.

When asked by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., at a Senate confirmation hearing in 2010, when Lew was nominated to be head of the Office of Management and Budget, whether the deregulation pushed by Rubin and former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan had “contributed significantly” to the banking crisis, Lew responded:

“Senator, I don’t consider myself an expert in some of these aspects of the financial industry. My experience in the financial industry has been as a manager, not an investment adviser. My sense, as someone who has generally been familiar with these trends, is that the problems in the financial industry preceded deregulation. There was an increasing emphasis on highly abstract leveraged derivative products that got us to the point, that, in the period of time leading up to the financial crisis, risks were taken, they weren’t fully embraced, they weren’t well understood. I don’t personally know the extent to which deregulation drove it, but I don’t think deregulation was the proximate cause.”

Really? That is a statement of such deliberate ignorance that one must marvel at Lew’s audacity in uttering it. He was one of the top economic officials in the Clinton administration when the president signed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act into law that declared all of those “derivative products” exempt from the reach of any existing government regulation or regulatory agency. It was aimed at silencing the warning of Brooksley Born, who, as head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, attempted to control the burgeoning market in the toxic assets that have carried such a huge human price in foreclosed homes and lost jobs.

Not only did Lew go along with the Clinton administration’s policy, he continued to endorse a radical deregulatory approach to financial markets as a board member of the Hamilton Project, funded by Rubin at the Brookings Institution. Lew’s myopic view of the origins of the economic meltdown, at odds even with Greenspan’s own admission of culpability, hardly qualifies him for the top economic position in the Obama administration. As Sanders told the Post this week, “In my view, we need a Treasury secretary who is prepared to stand up to corporate America and their powerful lobbyists and fight for policies that protect the working families in our country. I do not believe Mr. Lew is that person.”

But if we need that quality in a Treasury secretary, we certainly need it even more in the president, and given Obama’s appointments—from Lawrence Summers through Geithner and now Lew—it is clear that he is not that person. In announcing Lew’s nomination, the president only once referenced his chief of staff’s Wall Street experience, noting, “He helped oversee ... one of our largest investment banks.” That he also helped destroy it was buried as an inconvenient truth. 

It is also an inconvenient truth for those “progressives” who gave Obama a pass on the dismal economic performance of his first term when he bailed out the banks but not their victims. At a time when the Federal Reserve continues to purchase $40 billion each month of Wall Street’s toxic assets and provide the ever more concentrated financial conglomerates with interest free funds, the president dares brag that “We’ve put in place rules to prevent that kind of financial meltdown from ever happening again.” No, he hasn’t, and with Lew holding down the fort at Treasury, he won’t.

Author pic
ABOUT Robert Scheer
Robert Scheer, editor in chief of Truthdig, has built a reputation for strong social and political writing over his 30 years as a journalist. His columns appear in newspapers across the country, and his in-depth interviews have made headlines. He conducted the famous Playboy magazine interview in which Jimmy Carter confessed to the lust in his heart and he went on to do many interviews for the Los Angeles Times with Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and many other prominent political and cultural figures.

More of the same. The Augean

More of the same. The Augean Stables cannot be cleansed. Trillions of dollars will be used for speculation, instead of being invested in the real economy. THE GREEN ECONOMY. Those while-collar criminals who call themselves bankers and financiers, these hedge fund and private equity fund operators, big oil exploiting shale oil, drilling like crazy all over the U.S. It's not safe. Fracking will destroy America's water resources, poison its air. This generation of policymakers and so-called businessmen will be cursed by our children and grandchildren. They will pay the price.

Infighting among progressives

Infighting among progressives that voted for Obama must warm the heart of the predatory banks, as if progressives had any other choice with a chance of winning.

Bend over and grab your

Bend over and grab your ankles America, the last 4 years were just the foreplay, now it's gonna hurt.

Listen, folks, only the

Listen, folks, only the starry-eyed, solely-emotionally-driven "Progressives" (or of any other label) voted for Obama because they felt he would finally enact sound economic policy. The rest (and we must pray, the most) did so considering the alternative. With a Dem in office, there is a better chance than with a Repub in office of going next to greater sanity.

My reasons for voting for Obama were different than that, and the same as they were the last time. That is a subject for another time. For now, back to Scherr:

Seems to me Scherr is now trying to effect the current administration to do less bad and more good. Anyone have a problem with that idea? I don't.

Seems to me that Cyr is trying to encourage folks to abandon both of the 2 major political parties, toward a hopefully more effective thirds. Anyone have a problem with that? I don't. The problem with that has not been in the idea, it has been in the fear of the electorate to lose any of the particular spoils they enjoy from the inequities of the system. I have been "a pox on both their houses" guy since I was 16 yo in 1969, and I put my actions were my mouth was until I voted for Obama, 39 years later.

I don't believe in a magical Creator being, nor the myths of Jesus Christ, but I do like some of the phrases attributed to the literary character. Today, this one comes to mind: Let those among you who have not sinned cast the first stones.

Scheer voted for Obama, with

Scheer voted for Obama, with full confidence that he would do what Scheer says he doesn't want done.

The "progressives" are the liberals who keep voting for the corporate party's Democrats so they can keep "protesting" against what they keep voting for.

America's "progressives" are its counter-revolutionaries... the corporate-state's special forces, deployed to murder any movement that rises up from the Left that it fails to moderate into uselessness.

They are not "liberal" or

They are not "liberal" or "progressive". Your assertion is ridiculous.

Another GREEDmongering

Another GREEDmongering psychopath/thieving Wall Street "Savvy Businessman" running the US Treasury for the criminal cabal that's bleeding Amerika dry.

Comment with your Facebook account

Comment with your Disqus account

Top Stories

comments powered by Disqus

NationofChange works to educate, inform, and fight power with people, corruption with community.

If you would like to stay up to date with the best in independent, filter-free journalism, updates on upcoming events to attend, and more, enter your email below:

7 Compelling Reasons Why You Should Support NationofChange

Our readers often tell us why they’ve decided to step up and become supporters. Here are some of the top reasons people are giving.

1. You’re keeping independent journalism alive
The corporate owned media has proven that it can’t be trusted. In a media landscape wrought with spin and corruption, NationofChange stands in very scarce company.

2. You’re sticking it to the rich, powerful, and corrupt
When you have money in this country you can get away with damn near anything, and they do. NationofChange isn’t afraid to expose these criminals no matter how powerful they are.

3. Your donation is 100% tax-deductible
NationofChange is a 501(c)3 charity. People tend to assume that many other organizations are (most nonprofits are NOT) but it’s that 501(c)3 status is a bit more rare than you think.

Read the rest...