This is a very difficult subject. The idealist in me supports it wholeheartedly. The 'realist' finds myself thinking along the pres elects lines. The Madoff episode presents a very timely illustration of the ethical difficulty. Let him plead out in exchange for going easy on relatives etc ... so that you can partially help those who have been hurt. Or toss his in jail, no deals to set an example.
I struggle with this in my book never to be published :).
Add to it questions that over time will inevitably crop up with Obama himself and cabnit (see current Sec Tresury debate). No way he has not made some trade offs in coming to power. The campaign finance reversal being evidence of his moral 'flexibility'. Would I have done differently? Have I made similar trades in life? (yes) Ends justify the means?
There is one other piece to this that I think we as a country have to come to terms with. That is our collective responsibility. One can certainly argue that in 2000 Bush's values were an unknown. (being an ardent gore man it will forever haunt me). But in 2004 the election was on issues clear to all. We invaded Iraq. We had gitmo setup. Abu Gra made clear the issues with prisoners. Prosecuting the guards and nothing to those above was riduculous. Yet knowing all of this the country elected him. Elections have consequences.
No investigations is not acceptable, but at this juncture were does the line get drawn.
I agree, it is a difficult topic, but we are so very schizophrenic when it comes to holding our elected officials accountable. The new President wants to get on with his agenda, and I understand that sentiment, but look at the varied responses we have created to the scandals of the past 20 or so years. Clinton versus Oliver North as examples. Somehow, letting it fade sends the wrong message. Maybe you are right. We should have some kind of collective mea culpa addressing how these issues evolved over the last 8 years and how we could prevent them from happening again.
I'm largely on the same page. But the North vs Clinton analogy is apt. Do we investigate the North's (who in the grand scheme of things was a small fry; Lt Col's don't set policy)
I think we need to have congress (not the executive) initiate this. I think what troubles me about the article is that it appears he thinks the decision should be Obama's. Investigating questions of constitutional authority is clearly congress. And my current opinion of that institution is not high. In terms of consitutional authority, what is being done with the Tarp program in my view is roughly on the same level as some of the hot topics in the press. One could argue more so. See this commentary by Reich: http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/12/17/pm_reich_commentary/
I agree, Congress should initiate this, but I think President Obama is going to use some persuasion and some of the goodwill running around Washington to set the tone. He made it pretty clear that this is not something he wants to focus on in the near term. I tend to agree with Robert Reich as well.
4 comments:
This is a very difficult subject. The idealist in me supports it wholeheartedly. The 'realist' finds myself thinking along the pres elects lines. The Madoff episode presents a very timely illustration of the ethical difficulty. Let him plead out in exchange for going easy on relatives etc ... so that you can partially help those who have been hurt. Or toss his in jail, no deals to set an example.
I struggle with this in my book never to be published :).
Add to it questions that over time will inevitably crop up with Obama himself and cabnit (see current Sec Tresury debate). No way he has not made some trade offs in coming to power. The campaign finance reversal being evidence of his moral 'flexibility'. Would I have done differently? Have I made similar trades in life? (yes) Ends justify the means?
There is one other piece to this that I think we as a country have to come to terms with. That is our collective responsibility. One can certainly argue that in 2000 Bush's values were an unknown. (being an ardent gore man it will forever haunt me). But in 2004 the election was on issues clear to all. We invaded Iraq. We had gitmo setup. Abu Gra made clear the issues with prisoners. Prosecuting the guards and nothing to those above was riduculous. Yet knowing all of this the country elected him. Elections have consequences.
No investigations is not acceptable, but at this juncture were does the line get drawn.
B from B
I agree, it is a difficult topic, but we are so very schizophrenic when it comes to holding our elected officials accountable. The new President wants to get on with his agenda, and I understand that sentiment, but look at the varied responses we have created to the scandals of the past 20 or so years. Clinton versus Oliver North as examples. Somehow, letting it fade sends the wrong message. Maybe you are right. We should have some kind of collective mea culpa addressing how these issues evolved over the last 8 years and how we could prevent them from happening again.
I'm largely on the same page. But the North vs Clinton analogy is apt. Do we investigate the North's (who in the grand scheme of things was a small fry; Lt Col's don't set policy)
I think we need to have congress (not the executive) initiate this. I think what troubles me about the article is that it appears he thinks the decision should be Obama's. Investigating questions of constitutional authority is clearly congress. And my current opinion of that institution is not high. In terms of consitutional authority, what is being done with the Tarp program in my view is roughly on the same level as some of the hot topics in the press. One could argue more so. See this commentary by Reich:
http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/12/17/pm_reich_commentary/
B from B
I agree, Congress should initiate this, but I think President Obama is going to use some persuasion and some of the goodwill running around Washington to set the tone. He made it pretty clear that this is not something he wants to focus on in the near term. I tend to agree with Robert Reich as well.
Post a Comment