Wall Street Journal — Public Wary of Deficit, Economic Intervention
Poll numbers from the Wall Street Journal and NBC show rough waters for the administration, especially when trying to sell an expensive health care plan.
57 percent of Americans now think of Obama as very or somewhat liberal compared to 49 percent when he took office. 43 percent of Americans disapprove of many of his policies compared to 51 percent who mostly approve. When he took office, 32 disapproved of many policies and 65 percent mostly approved. Substantial majorities oppose the closing of Guantanamo Bay and the bailout/buyout of General Motors.
Attitudes about the current state of the economy have gotten worse since April, but most now believe the recession will be over with the year. Respondents showed increasing concerns about the federal deficit and thought by a wide margin that the government should be more concerned with reining in the deficit than stimulating the economy.
The president’s Supreme Court nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor, got high ratings – similar to those of John Roberts when he was nominated by President George W. Bush.
“When asked what the most important economic issue facing the country is, 24% cited the deficit, vs. just 11% who named health care.
Mr. Obama has some breathing room. Nearly three in four respondents said that the president inherited the current economic conditions, versus just 14% who said he is responsible for them. Only 6% said the Obama administration is most responsible for the budget deficit. Nearly half blame the Bush administration.”
New York Times — Partisan Ire Surfaces as Senators Start Work on Health Bill
John McCain called the first round of negotiations on the Kennedy health care plan “a joke” 15 minutes after they started. Dozens of blank pages and no cost estimates for huge chunks of the plan had Republicans outraged.
The other, more moderate, plan being proposed by Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., also had a bad day as a lack of cost estimates and specific structures pushed the launch date from Tuesday until sometime after the Independence Day recess.
By the end of the day, Democrats had mostly conceded that their promise to be considering meaningful legislation by August was shot.
Writers Robert Pear and David Herszenhorn explain that part of that resignation came when even agreeable Republicans started chiding them for political hackery – especially from Sen. Christopher Dodd.
“Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah, said Democrats had made some grave errors.
‘You advance legislation by focusing on areas of compromise, not strife,’ Mr. Hatch said. ‘Now unfortunately we are beginning a partisan exercise on perhaps the most important legislation of our lives. I am personally somewhat, well, actually, very disappointed, because I wanted a thoughtful bipartisan compromise that could have become a lasting legacy for my dear friend, Ted Kennedy.’”
New York Times — Outcry on Federal Same-Sex Benefits
No one seemed to like the president’s decision to extend some benefits to unmarried domestic partners, including gays and lesbians.
Most of the coverage focused on the surprising indignation of gay-rights advocates who said that coming after administration lawyers drew parallels between homosexuality and incest in a court filing in support of the Defense of Marriage Act, the president’s offer of the federal version of AFLAC and family leave to gay couples was “insulting.”
But the idea will likely be no hit with the majority of Americans who oppose gay marriage and view the move, under pressure from the gay community, as a step away from candidate Obama’s pledged that he opposed the idea.
The opponents of gay marriage were not much heard from in today’s papers, but they will be in time.
The big question now, though, is whether gay groups can keep making Obama jump.
“‘I think it’s insulting,’ David Mixner, a prominent gay rights advocate, said of the new benefits plan. ‘Without minimizing how it will improve lives to some extent, what they said to us today is we will give you family leave, some things like that, but the most important thing, health care, we’re not giving you.’
Mr. Mixner announced earlier this week that he was boycotting a coming fund-raiser being hosted by the Democratic Party’s gay and lesbian committee and featuring Vice President Joseph R. Biden because of what he considers the administration’s inaction on gay issues, and he said the president’s memorandum had not changed his mind.”
Financial Times — Relief on Wall St at proposed regulation plan
The thing Wall Street liked most about the plan to regulate the financial sector was its complexity. With uncertain mandates, a Byzantine structure and plenty of chances to tweak or derail in Congress, the plan was met with knowing smiles among those who it was supposed to be toughest on.
There were concerns, though, about the part of the plan most likely to advance – shifting the Federal Reserve from currency watchdog to financial regulator. Free marketeers dislike having the institution that controls access to currency also be in charge of enforcing politically generated regulations. The regulated, though, saw possibilities in politicizing the Fed.
Writer Francesco Guerrera caught the vibe down on Wall Street:
“‘We should be able to do business with the Federal Reserve as long as all these new powers do not go to its head.’
The response of a senior banker summed up Wall Street’s reaction to the Obama administration’s proposals for an overhaul of financial regulation: relief mixed with apprehension at the planned new powers to be assumed by the central bank.”
