(Recently I sent this email to some colleagues. We participate in a listserv of leaders in an industry that has been under attack by the current administration and the question came up this week about whether or not there will a lame duck session of Congress post-election and pre-swearing in of the next president. Here was my response to two of the people on the board.)
Dear G and S,
A lame duck session may or may not happen. On Friday, Pelosi says another financial rescue package aimed at the middle class is unlikely because the administration is not interested, so there is no point. On Saturday, Bush announced there will be a summit with world economic leaders to discuss the financial crisis after November 4, though his press secretary spent Friday saying the date is not set and Bush himself is saying that the crisis will be up to the next president to address – there is a list of crises to deal address.
So, yeah, a lame duck session would be lame…or so it seems. Under what circumstances might one not be lame?
Let’s assume some things, just for the sake of cognitive fun:
1. The democrats add 9-12 representatives to their majority in the House and 6 senators.
2. Okay, now assume, Obama wins and has coattails and the Democrats add 20, 25 or even 30 to the House, which would be the very best they could do, and assume Obama’s coattails bring 9 senators and perhaps as many as 11 if Republicans completely collapse. It is important to note that never before has such an event happened in American politics where two giant gains for the same party in back-to-back elections, but perhaps that is the reason it will happen. Nothing remains 100% or 0% forever.
3. Let’s put in the mix that Bush, who appears more and more disengaged and “weak” and, well, lame. He could be sold on the idea that a lame duck session is his last best hope of recouping some of his reputation and of un-tarnishing a legacy to which historians will certainly be taking an extra hard look.
4. Further, given the Blue Tide that will take over in January, current Republicans will want the lame duck session as well because it is their last best hope for economic influence for at least 2 years and perhaps longer. They would get some thing(s) for their corporate constituents before their cold January departures, especially if the Democrats have 60 votes in the senate.
5. If Obama, assuming he is elected, is true to his word, then he too would want a session. Why?
a. He would be in the thick of the efforts, would be seen as already working hard though admittedly his role is limited by his title of senator unless Bush defines a broader role for him in the ‘tween period.
b. His “reconstruction” would have a head start and he will need all the time he can get as there is plenty to work on.
c. His “reaching across the aisle” beginning the Monday after Thanksgiving (or whenever) boosts American’s confidence – the world’s confidence that a bold, globally united action is underway. This is good for financial markets.
d. He would be seen as – and confirmed as – being the change he has pledged.
Some History
In three brief weeks in small town New Hampshire in July 1944, the Western industrialized world met, discussed, planned and established three entities that would shape the economic development of the global economy for 60 years. During those 21 days the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the International Trade Organization were outlined as treaties. Within a year, two of them had been created. Only the trade treaty failed to be established because of resistance within the US. The World Trade Organization replaced it in 1995. The conference in 1944 is referred to as the Bretton Woods Conference. It cleared the way for world-wide reconstruction in a post-war world. Three weeks that changed everything.
Bretton Woods may have had more to do with how modern life is lived out that how events like The Great Depression and World War II did. Who knows, though it is an interesting question to ponder.
In 1971, Nixon unilaterally removed the USA from the gold standard, the agreed upon monetary standard established at Bretton Woods. From that point forward the US dollar has been considered the reserve currency. Though now the drop in the dollar’s value has in large measure caused a credit crisis. Your credit is in large measure determined by a ratio of what you are worth compared to what you owe. The more you owe, the less you are worth; the less you are worth, the less power you have in the marketplace. The less the dollar is worth, the less power the US has in the world.
Gordon Brown, prime minister of the UK and its former treasury secretary (if you will), has called for another Bretton Woods conference. Thousands of economists have called for integrated laws, policies and practices across industries to deal with the complete webification of global finance. We need to put the best leaders and the leaders we happen to have at this moment in our history and our best thinkers – not the yes-men and cronies and lackeys of the most powerful and richest players – we need to put the best leaders and thinkers together with the explicit purpose of a global redesign of our laws, their implementation, and interpretation, and pair it with the best of Madison Avenue’s marketers to teach in easy and accurate terms what the plan is, why it is what it is, how it will impact them in concrete terms, what naysayers will say and what their secret motivations will be, and how to practically assist leaders in getting it passed, implemented and lived out.
Capitalism has never been about getting rich. Living in a republic is not about me, myself and I above all other at all times. Value is not a word most commonly preceded by a dollar sign.
Americans have always rallied around an honest president who called on them to serve, to do, to commit, to do for common good. We are one nation, indivisible.
The people, by the people, for the people, with the people, about the people, surrounding the people, embracing the people, raising up the people, making stronger the people is what the unique, democratic republic in which we live the most precious – where people in partnership and oversight with government in partnership and oversight with free enterprise in partnership and the dreams of people make an infinite number of impossibilities possible.
So, for me, there is nothing lame about a lame duck session. It could save Bush, get the new president off on the right, allow out-going congressional Republicans a last (saving grace) contribution, provide congressional Democrats with a chance to start again on a better foot, and – above all else – it may just restart the world economy and help Americans believe again in the promise of better tomorrows.
Thanks!
D.
