Hopefully, the future will record that we had a crisis, but sized the opportunities afforded by the mounting promises of renewable energy and rode them to success. Hopefully, the future will not record that we were bogged down by the narrow interest of lobbyist and missed this golden opportunity.

Read more of this story »

Laurence Summers—head of the National Economic Council—responded to criticism of the Geithner Plan, “I don’t know of any economist who doesn’t believe that functioning capital markets in which assists can be traded are a good idea.” Economist Paul Krugman responded (NYT) saying that if Summers believe that bribing traders to participate is “better functioning” then Summers should get out more. Many economists believe that this plan could be disastrous.

The Plan would auction bad mortgages held by banks. The government would join the highest bidder with an equal purchase and provide a loan to the bidder up to 85% of the bid. The loan is supposed to provide leverage such that small upward movements will bring large gains to the speculator. According to Summers and Geithner, such auctions will determine their “fair” market value.

Of course small movements downward will bring loss to the speculator as well as the taxpayer, but the speculator can count on the government to do all it can to jack up home prices. Many economist, financers, and bankers have found the Plan disastrous.

Paul Krugman, Nobel Prize-winning (2008) economist, challenges the notion that such an auction will determine fair value as “market mystique.” He analyzes the arithmetic of the Plan and shows that it’s just another attempt to subsidize the real estate industry and mortgage bankers.

Read more of this story »

This post contains additional media. Click here to view the full post.

Republicans and Democrats are both already on the attack, ready to get horizontal with Obama and start throwing punches and snarky, clever, hissy-fit accusations about his failure to stand up for what he believes in, or tell him that he’s no better than any other lying “win-at-all cost” politician, or that he has no core beliefs and is just a celebrity who goes the way that the wind (or polls) blow.

Instead of crying foul, everyone– Republicans, Independents, and Liberals (and journalists!) alike should be happy. Instead, we all have been unknowingly trained to do the most illogical thing possible: let the media make us think that when politicians change their mind (or god forbid think!), or in this case think win-win, that they should be persecuted as liars, fakes, and spineless. As Mark Halperin and John Harris so astutely explain in their book, The Way to Win: Taking the White House in 2008, most Americans have been conditioned to prefer a president that is “strong and wrong” to one that is “weak and right.” Seems like Obama should have read the book, right?

Wrong!

Is there anyone reading this article who can tell me about a legislative accomplishment passed by Congress in the past 10 years that is memorable for how terrific it has been? I sure can’t. I can only think of bills and initiatives that for some reason or another have not worked out so well, or that have been minor accomplishments.

We should want a president, whether it’s Barack Obama or John McCain, who understands that he or she isn’t going to pass some sweeping legislation that “fixes” health care, triggers a giant “boom” in environmentalism and green initiatives, makes our education system “sounder”, or produces a perfect or “ideal” resolution to the wars abroad that currently involve and do not involve the U.S. Instead, we should cheer a president who does not steer away from his or her core beliefs, but at the same time makes room to find situations that are win-win.

I’m not applauding mediocrity. I’m simply suggesting that having a president, Republican or Democrat (or better yet from a third party) who acts without a “It’s my way, or the highway” Patrick Swayze attitude might help Congress to actually pass more meaningful legislation.

Good ahead, label me a centrist and a sell-out, tell me that these kinds of compromising presidents usually fail. I’d rather see that the U.S. government accomplishes something that creates positive changes in the long-run, or passes legislation that turns out to not be so great, rather than doing nothing at all and cursing the darkness. I’m still optimistic. And Paul Krugman, if you are reading this article, your opinions on why partisanship is good are puny and resentful: not very good for making progress, buddy.

So do I personally think that drilling is a good idea? No.

But do I think drilling might help bring more possibilities in the U.S. to have wind, solar, and hydro power if drilling is allowed with them in a legislation package? Yes.

I hope it’s windy and sunny on that oil rig.

Read More About the Debate on Offshore Drilling on the Green Options Network:

Bush Lifts Executive Ban on Offshore Drilling– Why It Matters and Why It Doesn’t

Americans Want to Drill

Poll: Americans Don’t Think More Drilling Will Lower Gas Prices

Photo Credit: Obama ‘08