Monday, October 27, 2008

We May Have a New POTUS on Nov 5th Instead of Jan '09

TW: Given the unusually intense crisis atmosphere we face and an utterly lameduck (not to mention discredited) current POTUS, we may have the POTUS-elect wielding real albeit indirect power pre-inaugeration in late January. This will be very interesting especially if it is Obama trying to share power with W.

From Bloomberg:
"Whoever wins will come under intense, immediate pressure -- unmatched since Franklin D. Roosevelt's election in 1932 -- to begin participating in policy making over which he'll have no formal control for 2 1/2 months. Within days, the winner's economic advisers may be heading to the U.S. Treasury to help tackle the nation's worst financial crisis in more than seven decades...Treasury officials are encouraging the candidates to waste no time getting a grasp of the $700 billion financial-rescue effort, even saying their aides can work out of the department, according to people who have spoken with the department.

That unparalleled level of cooperation reflects a sense of urgency that the handoff by Bush be as smooth and fast as possible...One awkward moment may come just 11 days after the election, when Bush convenes a summit of world leaders in Washington to discuss the crisis. The presence of the president- elect may cause some confusion.

...One act of reassurance for investors and consumers would be for the winner to quickly select someone to replace Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson...[Sen. Dodd said]Bush should even consider nominating his successor's choice for Treasury secretary.

...Whichever candidate wins will face a balancing act: While he must convey a sense of engagement and readiness to confront the challenge, he has to avoid the perception of being too eager to take the reins of power -- or of becoming too tied to policies set by his predecessor.
.
``There's only one president at a time,'' says John P. Burke, a University of Vermont professor who has written two books about presidential transitions. ``But maybe we've got to think about an exception here.''
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aFyM0BoK72AM&refer=home

No comments: