« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Tim Geithner, Secretary of Nationalization

Rewarding failure is not just for Wall Street anymore.  Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner has done such an uninspiring job over the past few weeks that many in Congress have called for his head.  Much like Wall Street where Washington, D.C. is rewarding failure with big bonuses and massive multi-billion dollar bailouts, the Obama Administration is following the “rewarding failure” strategy by putting forth a proposal that would grant the Secretary of the Treasury the unprecedented power to nationalize private enterprise.  And I bet you thought those types of ideas went out the door when the Iron Curtain fell.  If you believed the era of big government was over then you have not been paying attention.

In addition to spending trillions, printing massive new amounts of cash and trying to tax every aspect of life, President Obama wants the Secretary of the Treasury to become CEO of the USA.  According to the Washington Post today, “The Obama administration is considering asking Congress to give the Treasury secretary unprecedented powers to initiate the seizure of non-bank financial companies, such as large insurers, investment firms and hedge funds, whose collapse would damage the broader economy, according to an administration document.”  The federal government now has the authority to seize banks, but President Obama is asking for expanded powers for Secretary Geithner to be granted the power to nationalize any failing institutions that would damage the broader economy.  This is a terrible idea.

So let me get this right, President Obama has the second half of the TARP money, a $787 billion dollar stimulus plan for his liberal friends, an Omnibus with 8,500 earmarks, a $3.6 trillion dollar budget that will raise taxes on energy, pay for socialized medicine……and now he wants Congress to give his Secretary of the Treasury the power to nationalize private enterprise when he, in consultation with the President and the Fed, decide that a company is “too big to fail.”  This is a bridge too far and grants Secretary Geithner too much power over private enterprise. 

More from the Post:

The administration’s proposal contains two pieces. First, it would empower a government agency to take on the new role of systemic risk regulator with broad oversight of any and all financial firms whose failure could disrupt the broader economy. The Federal Reserve is widely considered to be the leading candidate for this assignment. But some critics warn that this could conflict with the Fed’s other responsibilities, particularly its control over monetary policy.  The government also would assume the authority to seize such firms if they totter toward failure.

Giving the federal government the power to seize industries that they feel would “damage the broader economy” is not something found in the Constitution and a power that should not be granted to a bureaucrat, let alone an elected official.  The same left that yells about the mismanagement of the War in Iraq and the federal response to Hurricane Katrina wants the federal government to run Wall Street.  Maybe they are salivating at the chance to reap huge bonuses for running companies into the ground, because the government is incapable of running a private company anywhere but down.  If companies were run like the federal government, then they would end up 10.7 trillion in debt, out of controll spending, waste, fraud abuse and corporate decision makers who are answerable to no one.

Secretary Geithner said yesterday that “we’re very late in doing this, but we’ve got to move quickly to try and do this because, again, it’s a necessary thing for any government to have a broader range of tools for dealing with these kinds of things, so you can protect the economy from the kind of risks posed by institutions that get to the point where they’re systemic.”  How are “we late” in doing this?  Conservatives believe that “we”, i.e. the federal government should not socialize losses and nationalize risk.  Do “we” want to be like Europe?  Do ”we” want to have a top down economy like many authoritarian and socialist countries?  How are we late?  We have a strong economy in relation to other nations throughout the globe; maybe “we” are late in screwing things up.

Of course Giethner believes that “we’ve got to move quickly,” because speed is the way you get these things through Congress with minimal debate and no time to review the intended and unintended consequences of action – See Obama Stimulus plan for an example.  Geithner believes that “it’s a necessary think for any government to have a broad range of tools for dealing with these kinds of things.”  No it is not necessary and proper for the government to have unimpeded and unprecedented powers so an unelected bureaucrat can take over private companies.  Our Founders and the Constitution dictate limited powers for the federal government not limitless powers.  

The federal government can’t fix the economy.  The federal government does not create anything.  It taxes and regulates.  Private enterprise creates and if you give the feds the power to run companies, you are putting on a road to European style socialism that no freedom loving American would like.  If these new powers are granted to Geithner by Congress to “protect the economy,” then Americans should not complain when the Nationalizer-In-Chief expands the program to cover non-financial companies and finds that Wal-Mart, McDonalds, Exxon Mobile, Microsoft, AT&T, Home Depot, Google, and Dell are “too big to fail.”

COMMENTS

  • paulincolo

    my very first thought exactly. This is a first step in attacking the oil companies and other energy producers. After all, wouldn’t a restriction of gasoline (say as a protest to higher taxes) be considered a systemic risk? Or those evil electricity providers who use coal? If anybody doesn’t think a govt run energy provider would not restrict power use to satisfy their leftist enviro schemes, you also haven’t been paying attention.

    PS – they will also go after the internet control “as a systemic risk to the economy”.

  • Brian Darling

    Yet you don’t see government give powers back to the people. This power grab by the Executive Branch is a dangerous precedent for free enterprise.

  • Jay_Cee

    It seems like a simple idea – why can’t we just prevent this from happening in the first place?

    If a single company gets large enough that it is “too big to fail”, then split it up as if it were a monopoly.

  • tedpomeroy

    AIG was a result of the Congress’ unwillingness to back the accounting profession in its regulation of financial companies.

    Have the FED appoint the Financial Accounting Standards Board.

    See my diary.

    The culprits at AIG? Cassano and Poling.

    Guess where Cassano and Poling spent their political contributions?

    Also see the IHT 10/30/2008.

  • CJB68

       Just sitting here waiting for that government nabob to come in demanding we work more hours for Der F?rher!  That’s something you can look forward to under a State-controlled industry, if my impressions from an interview with the Post Office back in the 1980s was an indication.  Those of us who’re willing to work will have to work the extra hours for our “democratic” leaders to get the taxes needed to support the favored constituents who keep them in power…

  • http://www.the41stvote.org rcov092

    GM andChrysler. Their failure would kill the UAW and pose a systemic risk to Obama’s chances of re-election. They are having a tough time bullying the debt holders to roll over and take risky equity.

    Rattnere has been warning of the specter of bankruptcy so the extended bailout ($31.0 billion for GM alone) looks DOA. Obama cannot afford to let that happen, his debt to the unions is too large.

    All the pieces are in place, he has a car czar to manage the seized entities, a Labor Secretary to carry the water for the Union’s (at the expense of the taxpayers) and a crack team of auto designers (see this http://the41stvote.org/wp/2009/01/bold-congressional-plan-to-save-automakers/) to produce the kinds of cars “the American consumer wants”.

  • Maggie_in_Indiana

    do they all go in and write down their socialist ideas for the country’s problems and put them in a bucket and throw it in the air? Which ever one one lands in front of Timmy is the plan for the day?

    It’s just one plan after another that is so far fetched Americans can’t keep up from day to day. Or is that the plan?