Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Uncharted Territory" in WA; Calpers Bargains with Schwarzenegger; "Fairy-Tale Promises" in NJ; "No Choice" in NY; Lawsuits in CO, SD, MN over Pensions
Ron Paul, Senator Tom Coburn Endorse B.J. Lawson
Los Angeles Comptroller Discloses $111 Million in Stimulus Creates 55 Jobs, Yet Defends the Program
CFO Survey: Optimism Tumbles, Employment Picture Bleak; Liquidity, Not Expansion Plans Behind High Cash Levels
Canadian Banks are More Prudent on Mortgage Lending than US Banks; I Can Prove It
Elizabeth Warren Tossed a Bone and Appointed Geithner's Lapdog

Uncharted Territory" in WA; Calpers Bargains with Schwarzenegger; "Fairy-Tale Promises" in NJ; "No Choice" in NY; Lawsuits in CO, SD, MN over Pensions

Posted: 16 Sep 2010 10:02 PM PDT

Pension and budget crises are hitting numerous states simultaneously. In some states lawsuits are flying. Here is a roundup sample that shows the crisis has reached critical mass.

Washington State in "Uncharted Territory"

KOMO News reports Washington State budget deficit hits $520 million, 6.3 pct cut next

Low tax collections are driving a new state budget deficit of about $520 million through mid-2011, leading to spending cuts of about 6.3 percent from Gov. Chris Gregoire.

Thursday's state revenue forecast showed continuing weakness in the national and state economies following the Great Recession. Arun Raha, the state's chief economist, said the economic picture is still in "uncharted territory."

Tax collections for the following two-year budget period are projected at about $670 million lower than previously expected. That makes the total drop in expected revenues about $1.4 billion, and the projected deficit for the upcoming 2011-2013 budget around $4.5 billion.

Spending cuts won't touch certain areas, such as basic education, pensions and debt service. But Marty Brown, Gregoire's budget director, said social services, corrections and community colleges will clearly face significant losses. That could lead to larger community college classes, fewer services for ill people and more.

Any plan that will not touch education or pensions is as advisable as pissing in the wind.

Calpers Proposes $2 Billion Loan to Aid California

Bloomberg reports Calpers in Talks With Schwarzenegger on $2 Billion Budget Loan

The California Public Employees' Retirement System said it is in talks with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's administration on a proposal to borrow $2 billion from the fund to help the state balance its budget.

Anne Stausboll, the fund's chief executive officer, said her staff has been holding informal discussions with Schwarzenegger's department of finance on a proposal that office has floated to credit the state with $2 billion this year as an advance on the roughly $74 billion the governor estimates the state would save during the next 30 years from his proposals to roll back pension benefits for government workers.

California has been without a spending plan since the July 1 start of its fiscal year as Schwarzenegger and Democrats who lead the Legislature remain deadlocked over how to fill a $19 billion deficit. The Republican governor has vowed not to sign any final budget unless it's accompanied by legislation to permanently cut the state's cost to finance workers' retirement benefits.

Borrowing $2 billion from a pension plan to balance a budget, when the pension assumptions are 8.5% is simply nuts. Schwarzenegger has finally taken a tougher stance against unions, but it's a little too late now that he is a lame duck.

Minnesota Pensioners Sue State Over Cutbacks

The Wall Street Journal reports Case Tests Retirees' Pension Cuts

A Minnesota court on Wednesday will consider whether the state can curtail pension benefits for current retirees from state jobs, in a case that could affect struggling public pension funds nationwide.

States have responded to budget shortfalls by raising the retirement age and cutting pension benefits for new hires. Minnesota last year replaced its previous pension formula, which increased retiree benefits annually based on investment gains and inflation, with a flat 2.5% increase. This May, the state lowered that increase for some retirees and eliminated it for others, until the pension plans are 90% funded, a level that could take decades to reach.

A group of Minnesota retirees already receiving benefits under older pension formulas sued the state in May, seeking class-action status.

State courts generally have ruled that states can't reduce benefits for workers who already have retired. While a ruling allowing Minnesota's new pension formula to stand wouldn't establish a single legal precedent across the country, it could encourage other states, hit by deep budget deficits and a wave of baby-boomer retirements, to try to reduce benefits for current employees and retirees.

Cases similar to Minnesota's are pending in South Dakota and Colorado, and other states are watching the Minnesota case closely as they ponder solutions to their own pension dilemmas.

Stephen Pincus, a lawyer for retirees in the Minnesota, Colorado and South Dakota cases, said courts have ruled that benefits for current retirees can be reduced only when the employer funding the pension plans is on the brink of insolvency.

Minnesota says retirees have no legal right to expect a specific formula of benefits. "A retiree's future benefits and rights are subject to reasonable legislative actions that are intended to preserve the fiscal integrity and stability of Minnesota's public employee pension plans," the state said in a court filing.

Jennifer Munt, a spokeswoman for the Minnesota council of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, said the public-employee union "reluctantly" supported the pension changes "because it protected our defined-benefit pensions by taking responsible actions to stabilize the pension funds." The union believes the retirees' lawsuit is "without merit," she said.

This is an enormous case and the most amazing thing about it is support for the state from the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. Hopefully, the judge will take that into consideration.

"No Choice" in New York - Governor Patterson Blames Unions

CBS News reports Gov: 'No Choice' But To Lay Off State Workers Early

Going back on a pledge not to layoff state workers before Jan. 1, Gov. David Paterson said Thursday a round of layoffs will begin before the end of 2010 to close New York's massive budget gap.

It's always that last question that produces the bombshell: "Why aren't you calling a spade a spade and talking about the unions in this state?"

And Paterson did not hesitate.

"They have left us no choice. We will probably, in fact, we will lay off workers before the end of the year," Paterson said.

Patricia Baker is the VP of the Public Employees Federation, which represents 59,000 New York State professional, technical, and scientific employees. The state unions have a written agreement with the governor that he will not lay off workers before Dec. 31.

"We do have an agreement with the governor and we're gonna hold him to that agreement," Baker said.

"They have fought and tried to restrain our administration at every turn," Paterson said.

"They will blame the layoffs on me, but in their hearts they know their failure to come to the table and give the slightest bit of concession is the reason that we are in the situation we're in now," Paterson said.

Indeed. This is the unions' fault. However, Patterson was a fool to make a promise he should have known could not be met.

New York Comptroller Projects Pension Fund Need 37% Taxpayer Boost

The Times Union says New York Pension Fund Drop = Tax Rise

Mandatory pension contributions for the state as well as municipalities -- including cities, towns and counties -- will jump 37 percent within two years thanks to a drop in the value of the recession-battered pension fund, Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli said Thursday.

And that likely means higher property taxes, deep cuts, or a combination of the two are just around the corner.

"Unfortunately, it takes the economy a lot longer to climb out of a hole than it takes to fall in it," DiNapoli said when he announced the rising contributions.

The percentage of their payrolls that governments will have to pay toward pension benefits will rise from an average of 11.9 percent to 16.3 percent for the payments due in February 2012. Many municipalities make that payment several months earlier to get a modest discount.

For police and firefighters, who are in a different, more generous pension system, the contribution will go from 18.2 percent of payroll to 21.6 percent. That's a 19 percent rise.

The bad pension news was pounced on by Republican Harry Wilson, who is challenging Democratic incumbent DiNapoli for the comptroller's job.

"I think we need to continue with the defined-benefit plan," DiNapoli said.

DiNapoli is incompetent and should be voted out of office.

"Fairy-Tale Promises" in New Jersey, Legal Battles in CO, SD, MN

Yahoo!Finance reports NJ gov. decries generous `fairy-tale promises'

After telegraphing his intentions for months, Christie spelled out the details of his proposal Tuesday. They include: repealing an increase in benefits approved years ago; eliminating automatic cost-of-living adjustments; raising the retirement age to 65 from 60 in many cases; reducing pension payouts for many future retirees; and requiring some employees to contribute more to their pensions.

"We must reverse the damage caused by fairy-tale promises that have fattened benefits and pensions to unsustainable levels," the governor said.

Christie has warned that New Jersey's pension fund will go belly up unless something is done to close the $46 billion gap between how much the state expects to bring into the system and how much it has promised to workers. Other states' pension funds are in shaky condition, too.

Keith Brainard, research director for the National Association of State Retirement Administrators, says it may be unprecedented that so many states at once are raising employees' pension contribution rates.

Among the developments around the country:

-- In Mississippi, employees of state and local governments and school districts are now being required to put 9 percent of their pay into the state retirement system, up from 7.25 percent.

-- Rhode Island in 2009 reduced cost-of-living increases and tightened eligibility requirements for retirement. Previously, employees could retire with 28 years of service. Now, those already employed by the state will have to meet a new standard that takes both age and years of service into account.

-- In Wyoming, as of Sept. 1, employees will have to start paying 1.4 percent of their salaries into a pension fund -- the first time in a decade the workers have had to contribute anything.

-- Vermont earlier this year changed the retirement age for many current employees. They must be 65, or their age and years of service must add up to 90. Previously, retirees had to be 62 or have 30 years of service at any age.

-- Lawmakers in Colorado, South Dakota and Minnesota rolled back cost-of-living increases this year for public employees who already have retired. In Colorado, retirees had gotten 3.5 percent annual increases. They are getting no increase at all this year, and future ones will be capped at 2 percent.

Legal challenges to the cuts have been filed in all three states.

"Whether legislatures have the power to change benefits for people who are already in the system, that's a tough question," said Ronald Snell, an analyst for the National Conference of State Legislatures who monitors public pension issues across the country. "It's unresolved in a lot of places."

Public Reaches Boiling Point

As always, three cheers for Chris Christie. Three cheers also for the actions of Colorado, South Dakota and Minnesota. These are small step by those states (in monetary terms of what needs to be happen), but gigantic steps in terms of possibilities if the court upholds the actions.

The public has reached the boiling point with public unions, and rightfully so. Unfortunately, fear of losing their jobs is the only reason some politicians have seen the light. Nonetheless, these actions are a very welcome step in the right direction, regardless of how weak the political motivation.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List

Ron Paul, Senator Tom Coburn Endorse B.J. Lawson

Posted: 16 Sep 2010 06:06 PM PDT

I am pleased to report B.J. Lawson Receives Endorsements from Leading Conservative Legislators

Today the Lawson for Congress campaign received strong endorsements from the leading doctors in Congress, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) and Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX). Lawson, a physician challenging Rep. David Price in North Carolina's 4th district, has made pro-market health care reform a cornerstone of his campaign. He strongly opposes the mandates, rationing and increased bureaucratic intervention in the health care delivery process.

Dr. Tom Coburn stated, "Our health care system is broken, and has only been made worse by this administration's actions. Americans face skyrocketing medical costs with declining quality and availability due to oppressive big government policies. Reversing these trends demands leadership that will return health care to patients and physicians, and get government and insurance bureaucracies out of our exam rooms. I'm proud to endorse Dr. William (B.J.) Lawson in his campaign for Congress in North Carolina's 4th District. As physicians, we have sworn to uphold the Hippocratic Oath -- putting patients first, and above all else, doing no harm. As public servants, we swear to uphold the United States Constitution and protect the freedoms of the American people. Dr. Lawson will stand with me in the United States Congress in support of these sacred principles."

Dr. Ron Paul added, "B.J. will be a stalwart defender of the constitution and individual liberties. In 2008 I supported his campaign because he was talking about the Constitution, limited government and reducing our global police force, I encourage everyone to stand with me in supporting him again in 2010. We need more people of Dr. Lawson's caliber in Washington D.C. "

"I am humbled to have the support of such principled statesmen as Drs. Coburn and Paul. If elected, I will join their fight to return to Constitutional principles, limit the size and scope of government, remove government bureaucrats from the health care delivery system and restore fiscal sanity to Congress," said Lawson.

B.J. Lawson is a Constitutional conservative, medical doctor and small businessman running against 22-year incumbent David Price, who votes with Nancy Pelosi more than any other congressman

Lawson in Lead vs. Incumbent David Price

The endorsements from Ron Paul and Senator Tom Coburn come at a great time, just as B.J. Lawson Pulls Into Lead in North Carolina Over Democratic Incumbent.

In case you missed it, please see a series of debates between B.J. Lawson and Price regarding the question What Should Congress do to Stimulate the Economy?

If you had any doubts about his ability to win this election, those doubts should now be history.

Don't Just Sit There Do Something!

Money is always welcome, but so is your time and energy! Please click here to Volunteer Time, Services, or Money to B.J. Lawson.

Please do what you can to support B.J. Lawson. He is of a rare Ron Paul mode, and we cannot afford to let any opportunities to elect such candidates slip through the cracks.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List

Los Angeles Comptroller Discloses $111 Million in Stimulus Creates 55 Jobs, Yet Defends the Program

Posted: 16 Sep 2010 04:25 PM PDT

Wendy Greuel, City Controller of Los Angeles, tells the Huffington Post that an Audit of Federal Stimulus Funds in Los Angeles Shows $111 Million in ARRA Grants Has Only Created 55 Jobs

I released two very disappointing audits today of how the City of Los Angeles has used American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds. The audits looked at the how the two departments that have received the largest amount of ARRA funding so far - the Department of Transportation (LADOT) and the Department of Public Works (DPW) - have used those funds and how many jobs were created. Los Angeles has become the largest City in America to conduct an audit of how ARRA funds have been expended.

DPW has received $70.65 million and created or retained 45.46 jobs, though they are expected to create 238 jobs overall (the fraction of a job created or retained correlates to the number of actual hours works). LADOT has been awarded $40.8 million and created or retained 9 jobs, though they are expected to create 26 jobs overall. Overall, the Departments have received $111 million in federal stimulus funds out of the $594 million the City has been awarded so far and created or retained 54.46 jobs.

I'm disappointed that we've only created or retained 55 jobs after receiving $111 million in ARRA funds. With our local unemployment rate over 12% we need to do a better job cutting the red tape and putting Angelenos back to work.

An Audit of ARRA Please?

Wendy Greuel goes on to defend president Obama and makes a claim "3.3 million jobs nationwide that have been saved or created because of ARRA".

This is one of those stories likely to go viral, not for her misguided defense of Obama, but rather the silliness of the situation in LA. However, the truth of the matter is stimulus efforts don't create any lasting jobs anywhere, and the claim "3.3 million jobs were saved or created because of ARRA" is simply preposterous.

As soon as the stimulus is cutoff every job "saved" will vanish into thin air, not to mention that the number 3.3 million is absurd from the start, even on a temporary basis.

Can I have a legitimate accounting of "ARRA" please? I bet the findings would be as bad as the City Controller of Los Angeles discovered.

On second thought, please cancel that audit request. It will be impossible to get anything close to a legitimate audit.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List

CFO Survey: Optimism Tumbles, Employment Picture Bleak; Liquidity, Not Expansion Plans Behind High Cash Levels

Posted: 16 Sep 2010 11:26 AM PDT

Duke University reports CFO Survey: Optimism Tumbles, Employment Picture Bleak

Optimism about the U.S. economy has fallen back to recession levels among chief financial officers (CFOs), who foresee minimal increases in expected hiring, weak consumer demand and heightened economic uncertainty.

Credit is still tight for small firms and many firms continue to hoard cash. Without improvement in the economy, CFOs say earnings growth and capital spending will falter within six to 12 months.

These are some of the findings of the most recent Duke University/CFO Magazine Global Business Outlook Survey. The survey, which concluded Sept. 10, asked 937 CFOs from a broad range of global public and private companies about their expectations for the economy. (See end of release for survey methodology.) The research has been conducted for 58 consecutive quarters. Presented results are for U.S. firms unless otherwise noted.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

-- CFO optimism about the U.S. economy has fallen to 49 on a zero-to-100 scale, well below the rating of 58 from the last quarter. Pessimists outnumber optimists four-to-one. European CFOs' optimism rate is 58; Asian CFOs' rate is 70.

-- Half of CFOs say they will cling tightly to cash due to economic uncertainty and as a liquidity buffer. The other half will spend some cash reserves in the next year, primarily for investment, to pay down debt and to make acquisitions.

-- Earnings are expected to rise 12 percent and capital spending almost 7 percent in the next 12 months. However, nearly half of CFOs say unless the overall economy improves, there is only a six-month window during which they can maintain this level of growth.

OPTIMISM PLUNGES

Optimism about the overall economy fell at 53 percent of U.S. firms and increased at only 14 percent. The optimism rate of 49 is at a level not seen since the first quarter of 2009, when CFOs rated the economy at 40.

"The CFO optimism index has proven to be an accurate predictor of future economic performance," said Julia Homer, executive vice president for content at CFO Publishing LLC. "Therefore, this dramatic drop in optimism bodes poorly for the economic outlook. Half of CFOs say there is only a six-month window -- and another one-fourth believe it's a 12-month window -- during which they can maintain current levels of business activity without improvement in the overall economy."

EMPLOYMENT STAGNANT

U.S. companies expect full-time domestic employment to inch up by 0.7 percent over the next year, while temporary employment will increase 0.8 percent. The labor picture is about the same in Europe, but much stronger in Asia (with expected growth of more than 5 percent).

"This rate of U.S. employment growth will increase payrolls, but not put a dent in the unemployment rate due to growth in labor force participation," Homer said. "Another negative employment trend is the recent surge in hiring contract and temporary employees rather than permanent workers."

U.S. CFOs say nearly one-fourth of recent hiring has been targeted at contract and part-time employees, up from 17 percent prior to the recession.

CREDIT CONDITIONS

"There has been no progress in fixing the credit problem over the last year," said Campbell R. Harvey, a professor of finance at Duke's Fuqua School of Business and founding director of the survey. "Indeed, half of the small businesses say credit conditions are worse than in 2009.

"The math is simple. A) Banks are sitting on cash because of their poor health and general uncertainty. B) Small and medium-sized firms have employment-generating projects that they cannot get financed because banks will not extend credit. C) In usual circumstances, small and medium-sized businesses account for the majority of employment growth. A+B+C implies we are stuck at 9 or 10 percent unemployment," Harvey said.

WHEN WILL CASH BE UNLEASHED?

"Cash exists in two locations: bank reserves and balance sheets of healthy companies," Harvey said. "Banks show no sign of unfreezing credit. They are lending to the government, not to businesses. However, U.S. firms are sitting on over $1.8 trillion in cash. When will it be unleashed?"

The survey results show 50 percent of respondents have no intention of deploying their cash over the next 12 months. More than half of responders say they will continue to sit on cash for liquidity to protect against another round of credit tightening and general economic uncertainty. Of the 50 percent that will deploy cash, only 56 percent will allocate to capital spending and investment.

"We were especially interested in the type of capital spending that creates jobs," Harvey said. "The survey shows only 22 percent of firms say their new capital spending will lead to hiring. This bodes very poorly for employment in 2011."

The above clip, while lengthy, is a partial list. There is much more in the survey including reports on Europe and Asia. Inquiring minds will want to give the survey results a closer look.

Cash is a Mirage

As for "unleashing cash" ... It's not really there in the first place. That cash is debt. I talked about the myth of corporate cash on two occasions recently.

August 12, 2010: Are Corporations Sitting on Piles of Cash?

Here was my answer.

So, in spite of what most are saying, corporations are not really holding tons of cash, ready at any moment to go on an investment or hiring spree.

Instead, corporations burnt by inability to raise cash during the 2008 credit bust are simply taking advantage of market conditions to raise cash levels now, at attractive rates, while they can.

Corporations raise cash in two instances

1. When they can
2. When they have to

After the corporate bond blowup in 2008, companies are wisely focusing on #1, while they still can. How much longer the market is willing to allow debt financing at favorable rates remains to be seen. When it stops, equities are likely to get clobbered.

Hiding Debt

August 20, 2010: Lease Accounting and the Corporate "Cash Mirage" - How Corporations Hide Debt

Raising Cash While They Still Can

Putting two-and-two together I cannot help but wonder if some of this recent corporate "cash raising" exercise is directly related to the proposed new accounting rules. Certainly rule #1 above applies, and for some corporations the window might close in a year.

Thus, it is highly likely some corporations are "raising cash" now, just to be safe, while they still can. That is one plausible explanation for at least a part of the massive corporate debt issuance as of late.

On the other hand, since when has there been any meaningful changes in accounting rules that were not discarded, ignored, or put on the back-burner for years or decades?

Regardless, we have yet another solid reason for stating that "high" corporate cash levels are nothing but a mirage.

Liquidity, Not Expansion

From the CFO report: More than half of responders say they will continue to sit on cash for liquidity to protect against another round of credit tightening and general economic uncertainty. Of the 50 percent that will deploy cash, only 56 percent will allocate to capital spending and investment.

Liquidity, not expansion plans is the reason for 50% of that cash. Only 28% is for capital spending and investment. Some of the rest is for share buybacks at stupid levels (undoubtedly while insiders dump their shares).

By the way, borrowing money to hold cash for liquidity purposes, with no intention of using it is a drain on earnings, although arguably not much since borrowing rates are low. Think of it as an insurance policy.

Of the 28% allocated for capital spending and investment, note that 75% of CFOs think the window to deploy that cash is 6-12 months max, a period "during which they can maintain current levels of business activity without improvement in the overall economy."

Good luck with that. Yet, the sideline cash myth permeates the airwaves.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List

Canadian Banks are More Prudent on Mortgage Lending than US Banks; I Can Prove It

Posted: 16 Sep 2010 10:14 AM PDT

Canadian reader Vince sent me a tongue-in-cheek email: "When it comes to lending, we are much more prudent than you Americans".

Vince offered this CIBC Up to 7% Cash Back Offer advertisement as proof.

CIBC Up to 7% Cash Back Offer could be for you if you:
Want to renovate, furnish or decorate your home
Would like to take a dream vacation
Want to prepare for any unexpected moving expenses
Want to make an additional lump sum payment on your mortgage
Need money for a special upcoming event such as an anniversary, wedding or child on the way
Want to renew an existing mortgage early, or transfer your mortgage from another financial institution and have prepayment costs to pay
Want to purchase investments, open an RESP or make an RRSP contribution
CIBC Up to 7% Cash Back Offer Key Benefits:
You get up to 7% cash back based on your mortgage amount and term1, to spend however you choose
This cash back amount is completely tax-free **
There are no cash maximums - the larger your mortgage, the more cash back you receive

What the hell can possibly go wrong with that?

For CIBC, not much, at least that I can tell right now. The reason is the Canadian Central Bank is on the hook if the buyer defaults.
For the idiots who pay too much, take cash out and blow it on a vacation in the Bahamas, quite a bit.
For the innocent bystanders unwilling to pay bubble prices, content on the sidelines until they have to bail out the above idiots with tax hikes or debased currency, also quite a bit.

On the whole, this looks pretty prudent to me, for CIBC, not for anyone else, until of course the whole mess blows sky high and most lending screeches to a halt with defaults running rampant.

In the meantime, party on CIBC executives. Just remember to take your bonuses for huge profits in cash, not shares. It's the American way.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List

Elizabeth Warren Tossed a Bone and Appointed Geithner's Lapdog

Posted: 15 Sep 2010 11:29 PM PDT

Under guise of being handed an important role, Elizabeth Warren was shoved aside and tossed a bone by President Obama. One might not know it from the New York Times headline Warren to Unofficially Lead Consumer Agency

Elizabeth Warren, who conceived of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, will oversee its establishment as an assistant to President Obama, an official briefed on the decision said Wednesday evening.

The decision, which Mr. Obama is to announce this week, would allow Ms. Warren, a Harvard law professor, to effectively run the new agency without having to go through a potentially contentious confirmation battle in the Senate. The creation of the bureau is a centerpiece of the Wall Street financial overhaul that Mr. Obama signed in July.

Calculated Risk offered a one line comment on his blog "I think Ms. Warren is an excellent choice."

I certainly agree. Unfortunately, no matter how much Obama tries to spin it, this has nothing to do with a "potentially contentious confirmation" but rather everything to do with Geithner winning the battle to marginalize her.

Marginalization of Elizabeth Warren

Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism hits the nail on the head in her appraisal Elizabeth Warren on Way to Being Sidelined as Head of Consumer Protection Agency, Relegated to "Advisor" Role

The body language of the Administration has been clear from the outset on the question of whether Elizabeth Warren would get its nomination to head of the new financial services consumer protection agency. Despite the occasional public remark regarding her undeniable competence, which really amounted to damning her with faint praise, Team Obama has never been on board with the idea.

The Warren marginalization isn't about personalities, although the powers that be love to pigeonhole thorns in their side that way. The clashes reflect fundamental differences in philosophy. Geithner, the Administration that stands behind him, and Dodd all are staunch defenders of our rapacious financial services industry, even though they make occasional moves to disguise that fact. Warren, by contrast, is clearly a skeptic, and a dangerous one to boot, because she understands the abuses well and is able to communicate effectively with the public.

Expect Warren to be pushed further to the sidelines, just as Paul Volcker has been (oh, and pulled out of mothballs when the Administration desperately needed to create the appearance it really might be tough on banks. Perhaps they hope her tenuous standing as acting head can be used to keep her in line.

Geithner's Lapdog

Yves points out an MSNBC headline revised from "Wall Street critic won't get top consumer job" to the anodyne "Wall Street critic to help set up consumer agency".

Both versions exist in cyberspace if you check.

However, all you really need to know can be found in a single sentence in the New York Times article. "She will also be a special adviser to the Treasury secretary, Timothy F. Geithner, and report jointly to Mr. Obama and Mr. Geithner."

An adviser to Geithner?! Good Grief. This is the tune I hear: With a knick-knack paddywack give a dog a bone, Obama just sent Warren home.

I am sure she will do the best she can, but on Geithner's leash, I rather doubt she will be able to accomplish much of anything.

I hope I am wrong.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List

Home Refinance Calculator

Thursday, September 16, 2010

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis

No comments:

Post a Comment