Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (32381)	2/10/2009 2:44:51 AM
From: Peter Dierks	Respond to of 71588

Obama Finds Righteous Anger Is Hard to Contain Inconsequential 'conflicts' exist for most nominees FEBRUARY 9, 2009 By SUZANNE GARMENT A mini-wave of controversies has washed over President Barack Obama's nominees for key positions in government. The press has mostly described them as substantive tax issues. But the controversies are about something larger -- the continuing power of scandal in American politics. Taxes are a natural trigger for scandal. Timothy Geithner's alleged failure to pay all of his taxes became a hot issue because, as Treasury secretary, he will oversee the IRS. Tom Daschle's biggest tax issue was not declaring the services of a personal driver as income. Nancy Killefer, who had been tapped to streamline federal spending, ran into trouble for a small infraction because it seemed to feed an unflattering narrative. An inaccurate tax return can be and usually is seen by the public as evidence of cold-blooded dishonesty or high-priced manipulative tax planning. But other more complicated motives might be at work. Some taxpayers think they understand things they don't. Others are hit by deer-in-the-headlights syndrome when faced with the complexity, consequences and embedded guilt of taxes. Some are in self-serving denial because of a particular guilt. (Nanny? Cleaning lady? I'm middle-class. I don't pay people to scrub my house and raise my baby.) Many people abdicate tax compliance to their accountants and sign their returns in blind relief. Naturally, the public has no sympathy. Everyone has to pay taxes and most people manage to do so with fair accuracy. Therefore we have a certain deserved sense of righteousness about taxes and do not consider that some tax puzzles are more puzzling than others. This righteousness is the ambient dust of politics. It can easily be ignited into an explosive scandal. Each explosion damages a president's ability to govern. So presidents should avoid striking unnecessary sparks. Upon taking office, Mr. Obama -- despite continuing his campaign rhetoric of economic fairness by freezing salaries for top White House staffers and tightening rules on lobbyists -- seemed to want to avoid additional sparks. He stood by Mr. Geithner, despite the nominee's tax troubles, and emphasized that the financial crisis made Mr. Geithner indispensable. If the standard was that "you'd never made a mistake in your life," the president said, "none of us would be employed." Similarly, when Mr. Daschle first ran into trouble, Mr. Obama cited the importance of health-care reform and said that he "absolutely" supported his nominee for secretary of Health and Human Services. Meanwhile, Mr. Obama waived his new lobbying rules to nominate a lobbyist for defense contractor Raytheon to be deputy secretary of Defense. Mr. Geithner was confirmed, but Mr. Daschle and Ms. Killefer withdrew their nominations. Washington began buzzing with accusations that the administration was guilty of hypocrisy. Mr. Obama then tried to regain control of the conversation. "Ultimately it's important," he said, "to send a message that there aren't two sets of rules, one for prominent people and one for ordinary folks who have to pay their taxes." He took responsibility for his nomination process and said, "We're going to make sure we fix it so it doesn't happen again." Gone was the president who had said that one mistake should not outweigh qualifications acquired over a lifetime and needed in a critical job. In his place, a chastened Mr. Obama affirmed the need for moral rectitude. He then set the bar higher, promising closer scrutiny. The president did not need to raise the bar, and he can't prevent future embarrassments of this type. As if to prove the point, the press is now airing allegations of possible conflicts involving Leon Panetta, Mr. Obama's choice to lead the CIA. The allegations are thin. One stems from the fact that Mr. Panetta received a payment from the Carlyle Group, which owns a company that does consulting work for the CIA. Another is based on fees received by Mr. Panetta's consulting firm from the shipping industry, which lobbies the government on terrorism laws that affect shipping. These "conflicts" are remote and should be outweighed by the gravity of the job of leading America's premier spy agency. Indeed, such potential conflicts exist for most nominees with the experience needed to fill important jobs in government. But we can no longer hope that the president will make such an argument. Ms. Garment, a tax attorney, is the author of "Scandal: The Culture of Mistrust in American Politics" (Random House, 1991). online.wsj.com