Polarizing Express

There's plenty to worry about in the tendencies and policies of the Obama administration, and in a sane country in a sane time, debating them sanely would be a good idea. But the most glaring apparent problem is that we haven't gotten beyond the ideological polarization of the Reagan through Clinton through Bush years. In fact, it's become so extreme that is seems headed for some kind of apocalypse, before age and race demographics take firmer control. Sanity is the casualty.

Still, even in this toxic atmosphere where dealing with reality is a dream, the realities remain. The upcoming fateful Afghanistan decisions. Iran and its nuclear fixations. Policies on leftover Bush atrocities--trials, torture, rendition, secrets. But the most pressing "domestic" issues are funnelling again into one: the economy.

There's a lot of anger everywhere about the financial sector, which is spilling over into anger about efforts like the Recovery Act to deal with employment and the real economy. At the moment, Congress and the media are responding to the anger. They just don't seem to have any ideas on what to actually do.

The Obama administration, like most administrations that take governing seriously, is caught in the middle. Reigning in Wall Street, getting help to Main Street, are taking a lot of time and wearing out everyone's patience.

But the problems are complicated and I find myself so confused that I am equally persuaded by two diametrically opposed columns in the New York Times today, one by Paul Krugman, the other by David Brooks.

I usually find myself agreeing with Krugman, and hardly ever with Brooks. Yet even those these columns take opposite sides on the effectiveness of Treasury Secretary Geithner, I see ways in which they both are correct. It's possible that the Obama team was dealt some really bad cards by the Bushies and Wall Street, and they've done the best they could. The second Great Depression was avoided, and for the vast majority life goes on. Yet what the Obama team did and is doing may not be enough, or it may have not really been what was really needed--just what was possible to avert the worst.

The road ahead looks at least as complex and confusing. Unemployment rates in the nation and in individual states (like California) are higher than in recent memory. Business experts say unemployment nationally is likely to hang around 10% for another year. And though there are signs of stronger economic activity and a slowing of job losses, the social fabric--as well as many lives--may not be able to take much more of this strain.

Can unused TARP money be devoted to job creation and targeted to Main Street? Will the pressure to relieve the deficit and the GOPer-whipped up antigovernment sentiment prevent the kind of aggressive job creation efforts that Krugman and others believe is necessary?

Then there's the healthcare bill, which is itself a healthy job creation and anti-deficit measure, a necessity for future economic health. If it goes down, the immediate future is bleak. If it passes, then the atmosphere may change, or at least we'll get more clarity on where the public mood actually is.

Update: Apropos the Recovery Act, an article in the Saturday NY Times claims that a consensus of economists agrees that it is working: "The legislation, a variety of economists say, is helping an economy in free fall a year ago to grow again and shed fewer jobs than it otherwise would. Mr. Obama’s promise to “save or create” about 3.5 million jobs by the end of 2010 is roughly on track, though far more jobs are being saved than created, especially among states and cities using their money to avoid cutting teachers, police officers and other workers."