Beginning Big, Beginning Bold

President-Elect Obama's radio/YouTube address, announcing his intention to pass a two year Economic Recovery Plan immediately upon taking office. The text follows, with my emphasis added. I posted the video at Dreaming Up Daily:

"The news this week has only reinforced the fact that we are facing an economic crisis of historic proportions. Financial markets faced more turmoil. New home purchases in October were the lowest in half a century. 540,000 more jobless claims were filed last week, the highest in eighteen years. And we now risk falling into a deflationary spiral that could increase our massive debt even further.

While I’m pleased that Congress passed a long-overdue extension of unemployment benefits this week, we must do more to put people back to work and get our economy moving again. We have now lost 1.2 million jobs this year, and if we don’t act swiftly and boldly, most experts now believe that we could lose millions of jobs next year.

There are no quick or easy fixes to this crisis, which has been many years in the making, and it’s likely to get worse before it gets better. But January 20th is our chance to begin anew - with a new direction, new ideas, and new reforms that will create jobs and fuel long-term economic growth.

I have already directed my economic team to come up with an Economic Recovery Plan that will mean 2.5 million more jobs by January of 2011 - a plan big enough to meet the challenges we face that I intend to sign soon after taking office. We’ll be working out the details in the weeks ahead, but it will be a two-year, nationwide effort to jumpstart job creation in America and lay the foundation for a strong and growing economy. We’ll put people back to work rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges, modernizing schools that are failing our children, and building wind farms and solar panels; fuel-efficient cars and the alternative energy technologies that can free us from our dependence on foreign oil and keep our economy competitive in the years ahead.

These aren’t just steps to pull ourselves out of this immediate crisis; these are the long-term investments in our economic future that have been ignored for far too long. And they represent an early down payment on the type of reform my Administration will bring to Washington - a government that spends wisely, focuses on what works, and puts the public interest ahead of the same special interests that have come to dominate our politics.

I know that passing this plan won’t be easy. I will need and seek support from Republicans and Democrats, and I’ll be welcome to ideas and suggestions from both sides of the aisle.

But what is not negotiable is the need for immediate action. Right now, there are millions of mothers and fathers who are lying awake at night wondering if next week’s paycheck will cover next month’s bills. There are Americans showing up to work in the morning only to have cleared out their desks by the afternoon. Retirees are watching their life savings disappear and students are seeing their college dreams deferred. These Americans need help, and they need it now.

The survival of the American Dream for over two centuries is not only a testament to its enduring power, but to the great effort, sacrifice, and courage of the American people. It has thrived because in our darkest hours, we have risen above the smallness of our divisions to forge a path towards a new and brighter day. We have acted boldly, bravely, and above all, together. That is the chance our new beginning now offers us, and that is the challenge we must rise to in the days to come. It is time to act. As the next President of the United States, I will. Thank you."

My sentiments exactly. From the Boston Globe.

Transition Flood

We aren't talking leaks anymore--this is a flood.

In addition to official announcements (David Axlerod as WH senior advisor, Greg Craig as White House Counsel, Lisa Brown will serve as Staff Secretary, and Chris Lu as Cabinet Secretary), there were apparently sourced stories that Tom Daschle, former Senate Democratic leader, is to be named Secretary of Health and Human Services, and will largely be in charge of getting universal health care created and passed.

Also that, pending final vetting, Janet Napolitano has been named Secretary of Homeland Security, and Chicago businessperson and a chief architect of the Obama fundraising apparatus Penny Pritzker has been likewise slotted for Secretary of Commerce. Update: Pritzker issued a statement Thursday that she's not taking a cabinet appointment. These are mostly Obama people, midwestern and except for Daschle, on the young side of 60.

And more "signs" that Robert Gates is considering/is being asked to, stay on as Sec of Defense.

These gushed out Wednesday, after Tuesday's spill of Peter Orszag as Budget Director and Eric Holder as Attorney General. Most of these apparent appointments have been praised. I've noted elsewhere that Orszag's appointment, along with Obama's message to the Climate Summit signals that the Climate Crisis will be high on Obama's agenda. The same may be said, with Orszag as well as Daschle, that health care isn't going to be left behind either.

But all this continues to be subsumed to the continuing noise over Hillary, will she or won't she. Wednesday saw more push-back in the media, with a few CW heavyweights like Tom Friedman and David Broder warning against it, and more stories alluded to distress within Team Obama over the Drama Queen appearances. The Times suggests Aides in each camp have grown increasingly sour toward the other in recent days as the matter played out publicly.

Also some attempts to mute the media mantra of the Obama administration as Clinton redux. Al G. put it this way:No Obama administration staffers are more guaranteed to be free of Clintonesque manipulation or fantasy than those like Craig and Holder that at great risk to their careers bucked the Clinton machine back when the polls suggested Senator Clinton's "inevitable" nomination to the presidency. They're battle-tested, inoculated and have zero illusions about wanting to relive the failed Clinton presidency. They've learned decisively from its mistakes in a depth and detail that most will never have the chance to do.

If these names turn out to be actual appointments, it does suggest that Obama is fielding less a Team of Rivals as an All-Star team. These are star skill players at their positions.

As for all the transition leakiness, there are reporters complaining that they aren't getting enough leaks. I don't know if I can blame the Clintonistas for all of them. They are starting to look like trial balloons--get the names out there and see if opposition develops, especially for the Cabinet level posts that require Senate confirmation.

Okay, back to the fun part: the election. The numbers continue to roll in, and Obama continues to gain votes. He's gone from winning by 5% in the popular vote on election night to now ahead by about 7%: with over 67 million votes now, Obama has 52.7% to McCain's 45.9.

Even where Obama lost, he gained--or won something. Missouri has finally been called for McCain, but only by 3,632 votes. Obama lost Utah of course--but get this, he won Salt Lake County, which includes Salt Lake City (by just over 200 votes.) The GOP won the county by at least 20 points in the last two elections.

Meanwhile the Minnesota Senate recount has begun--Franken made up some ground on the first day, but there's a long way to go.

Transition Watch

Democrat Mark Begich has been elected as U.S. Senator from Alaska. At this hour the AP and the Anchorage newspaper have called it for him, since his lead exceeds the number of ballots yet to be counted.

Democrats kept a Senate seat in their caucus earlier Tuesday by admonishing Joe Lieberman, taking a subcommittee chair (which while minor, still removes him from any power over climate crisis legislation) but allowing him to remain chair of the Senate Homeland Security committee. Afterwards, Joe the Traitor acknowledged that he owed his retention to Barack Obama.

The Lieberman deal and the prospects of Hillary as Secretary of State are being placed in the context of Obama's postpartisanship, changing how Washington works, as well as getting everybody to work together on some very serious problems. The Hillaryites seem to be trying not to screw up Hillary's options by talking too much, but they can't completely control themselves, as usual. Obama has to suspect that this isn't going to change.

We'll see how this plays out. Though I'd like to see Joe the Traitor dealt with sooner rather than later, he will be dealt with--by the voters of Connecticut. By then maybe he will have transformed himself again. I remain skeptical about Hillary, but the idea is getting general approval. I remain impressed with Obama's consistency, by his vision and by his patience, specifically in these matters.

As far as I'm concerned, the big news of the day--ignored by everyone--was Obama's statement on the Climate Crisis. I'll be writing about that shortly at Dreaming Up Daily.

Drama Queens

The unavoidable gossip beginning late Thursday and continuing all Friday has been Hillary as Sec of State. I'm flummoxed by the whole notion. If No Drama Obama needed any more evidence of what this would bring his administration, the very fact of the firestorm of talk about Hillary, the Drama Queen (and I use the term in its non-gender specific, and non-sexual preference sense) should be convincing. Hillary comes fully equipped with her loud mouthed loyalists, partisans to the core, including some certifiable morons (Lanny Davis) and louts (Howard the Wolf.) Plus the Big Dog.

Meanwhile the stories are battles of contradictory sources. Some say she's been offered the job. Others say there was one discussion, to see if she is interested (and perhaps, one would guess, if she'll submit to being vetted, including questions of Bill.) Some say the Obama team is behind the talk or isn't sufficiently denying it, others say that after Clinton, Obama interviewed Bill Richardson, and he hasn't told anyone who he favors. (Which sounds like his usual modus operandi at this point.)

I don't know these people, I don't know what Obama knows, but from where I sit, it's a bad, bad idea. Hillary is toxic, if only for her people and their brand of vicious partisanship. How can Hillary and Bill Richardson be in the same Cabinet after all the Judas crap of the campaign? And Richardson has to be in this cabinet. I think he's best positioned at State--an outward looking post, a groundbreaker for Latinos, as he represents the U.S. in the world. He's an experienced diplomat and administrator; Hillary is neither. She may be very knowledgeable, which might make her a decent National Security Advisor, but anywhere in the White House she's going to inspire intrigue, second-guessing and backbiting. If not by her, then by her minions. And there is always, always Bill, who not even she can control. If Obama is really considering her--and there are also reports that there is substantial opposition to the idea within Team Obama--then he is a lot more confident/sanguine/tolerant than me, but I see it as, at best, a huge drain on the energy that needs to be focused. Team of Rivals sounds great, but it has to be a team, and I don't see a team player--at least one capable of controlling the rowdy elements she brings with her.

But...there are a few puzzled and doubting journalists among the enthusiasts for the story, with a heavy dose of vituperation from Al G. at the Field, who believes the media frenzy is being generated by vengeful Clintonians who want to deny State to their enemies, Richardson and John Kerry. I'm not quite sure of the logic of this part, but I share the feeling that this is being generated by Clinton loyalists, for whatever reason (like they have to have any.)

And while I'm on my high hobby horse, I was glad to see Pat Leahy and Bernie Sanders go public with their conviction that Joe Lieberman needs to be replaced as chair of the Homeland Security. I'm with them, and not with wusses like Evan Bayh. It's one thing not to hold grudges. It's another to subvert your agenda and complicate what's already a complicated situation in the Senate with competing agendas you can avoid. Leiberman is another Drama Queen.

In Alaska, Dem candidate Mark Begich is now up 1,022 votes, with 24,000 left to count next week. He needs to be ahead by about 1500 to avoid a state-funded recount, which in any case doesn't sound like the ballot-by-ballot hand recount that Minnesota conducts. Sounds like he has a pretty good chance of achieving what he needs without a recount.

Transition and Other Gossip (Plus Farewell to Ted the Felon in Alaska)

Part of why the media and blogosphere are full of misinformation and leaping to conclusions is that this transition is just damn exciting. People are excited! Polls show that ordinary Americans are even hopeful, and the likelihood of sweeping change is exhilarating.

So as long as you and I understand that this is all just gossip, why not indulge? Some of the credible names I'm spotting for Secretary of Health and Human Services: (Dr.) Howard Dean, Kathleen Sibelius (who took on Blue Cross in Kansas) or Tom Daschle (wrote a book on health care crisis.) Sibelius is also mentioned for Commerce, Education, Energy--does this mean she won't get any of them? Not that every appointment has to be a Big Name, but those are interesting ones. The actual jobs could just as well go to folks like James Lee Witt at Homeland Security, or James Comey at Justice.

Bill Richardson is still mentioned for State but also for Interior. That would be interesting, too, though it would be really neat if at last the Interior Department is run by a Native American. Tammy Duckworth is mentioned for both Veterans Affairs and Obama's Senate seat; Max Cleland is the other Veterans Affairs name.

Other big names I mentioned before and still think are credible: RFKjr., Janet Napolitano.

Big names being mentioned I really don't see in the Obama Administration: Ed Rendell, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore (though I'd be surprised if he wasn't a special envoy to the climate treaty next year), Richard Lugar, Colin Powell (don't think he wants another go-round), Ahnold. I do see a job for Mrs. Ahnold. I'm kind of agnostic about John Kerry for State. I don't think it will happen, and he's going to be an important force in the Senate.

Scientific types are really excited about the return of real science to the federal government, and are watching appointments like Director of White House Science and Technology Policy, and some key ones at lower crucial levels in the various departments. They're interested in what kind of scientist, what level of expertise, anything that signals policy. So far, some are pretty impressed with the relevant people on the transition team.

Meanwhile, the progressive blogosphere is very impressed with the transition Internet appointments, and the prospects for the first wired White House.

As for how the administration will work, Karen Tumulty isolates another quote from John Podesta's presentation Tuesday: President-elect Obama intends to continue the Domestic Policy Council and the National Economic Council. The important policy coordination role will be maintained in the White House. ... There's a central function of policy development coordination that takes place at the White House in conjunction with OMB. What he's looking for in a cabinet is people who are very strong, who can carry out the mandate, the missions of those agencies, and do it across the priorities that he's laid out to get the economy moving again, to get jobs moving again, to get wages growing again. "

Ambinder sees a transition paying a lot of attention to process, and: Obama seems to understand that the way he manages the White House during the first few week is absolutely vital to the smooth functioning of his administration after that."

Good news from...Alaska? Oh yeah. At close of business Wednesday, Democrat Mark Begich has erased Ted the Felon's 3,000 vote lead and now leads by 814 votes. With remaining votes to be counted Thursday (maybe Friday, maybe Monday as well) reported to come from Dem districts, Nat Silver sez Mark Begich is now an overwhelming favorite to win the Alaska Senate seat.

Reader Beware

I've been harping here on maintaining skepticism of reports on what Obama is and isn't going to do, who is and isn't going to be appointed, and what Obama does and doesn't want others to do. For increasingly good reasons. There's the pre-spin by people who have a self- interest. There are trial balloons, floated by similarly self-interested people as well as perhaps by the Obama team. There are the usual misunderstandings, by people overhearing things and reporters interpreting information.

Which has meant for instance that this morning headline gets denied tonight, as in the case of the supposed swap meet Bush and Obama held in the Oval Office yesterday. Or in the interpretation of a signal, which leads to strings of speculation, like on the Obama position on Joe Lieberman's fate in the Senate.

It was widely reported--and still is-- that Obama wants Lieberman's status to remain as it is, within the Dem caucus, and even retaining his committee chairs. But his spokesperson Stephanie Cutter indicated today that Obama's position is that he doesn't hold a grudge, but that Joe the Traitor's fate is up to Harry Reid and the Senate Dems. Well, there's a big difference between saying, Obama is not insisting Joe get thrown out, and Obama wants Joe to stay.

As to what we actually do know, John Podesta held a press conference to talk about the transition--TPM has the best summary I saw. The only thing missing is Podesta's response to a question that wouldn't these ethics rules banning lobbyist influence limit the people who might be appointed or be part of the transition? "So be it," Podesta decreed.

As we simultaneously look forward and evaluate the past campaign, Ambinder has this neat summary of why the Obama campaign was successful, such as Practice what you preach (trust the community organizers), and "Win Bigger/Lose Smaller:" "That was an Obama field mantra. The campaign opened up a field office in Warren Co., Ohio, where George W. Bush won by nearly 50 points in 2004. Well, Obama lost Warren County... but by 37 points. That's a big improvement. Losing by smaller margins in those smaller counties is how Barack Obama won Ohio."

And here for the record is another account of dancing in the street
on election day, this time in NYC. As I've said many times, if it wasn't for vicarious experiences, I wouldn't have many experiences at all.

In the continuing adventures of the three missing Senate seats, here's the latest on Alaska. Sounds like we could know a lot more Wednesday night or Thursday morning. Shannyn Moore reveals that election "irregularities" are not new in Alaska--for instance, 2004.

Electoral Map Quest

Map Quest: Top map shows presidential election results. Note that Missouri is still undecided--as of today, McCain is ahead by fewer than 5,000 votes with at least 7,000 ballots to be evaluated and counted. The second map is from the New York Times: the blue areas are where Democrats gained (not necessarily where they won.) In part, this reflects the Obama campaign philosophy of "win bigger, lose smaller." By the way, Obama's popular vote % is now 52.6 to McCains 46.1. You can ignore the Alaska map--there are more than a quarter of the total votes cast that are still to be counted.

Transition Watch

For the time being, I'm going to post little tidbits and political gossip over here--the kind of stuff that doesn't fit the more thematic Dreaming Up Daily blog. I posted here on the election principally because I wanted to have these posts on the same blog as posts on prior elections, for archival purposes mostly. With the very small traffic this site gets, its function apart from thinking aloud for a few friends and other readers has to be a kind of info diary, and to collect an archive that might be useful to someone later on.

Anyway, in today's information flow: Howard Dean is stepping down as DNC chair, a traditional move after a presidential election. My guess is he will be replaced by David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager, who has said he won't be going to the White House.

Obama's approval rating is near 70%, and 65% believe he has the potential to be a good President.

Barack and Michelle visited the White House Monday, the drafty old mansion built with slave labor. Apparently, Michelle's mother will also be moving in; she's been the primary babysitter for the Obama girls during the campaign, and this should help make the transition easier on them. So save the mother-in-law jokes.

As for further appointments and actions, my policy is to stick with actual announcements and on the record statements by the people who actually have top level responsibilities. Because there's a lot of hoo-haw out there, some of which may simply be to further the agenda or prospects of the source. So I view statements on Obama's policy on Gitmo trials and the intelligence agencies as not credible. But the on the record statements on the Sunday talk shows about Obama's plans to issue executive orders immediately on key items are very credible (although actual decisions on these were denied Monday.)

Sometimes the rumors fall all over themselves, as in this one-day chronicle of rumors on who might be appointed to fill Obama's Senate seat: it started with one African American woman (Valerie Jarrett) and winds up with another (Cheryle Jackson.) Jarrett, an Obama confidant, is instead likely to wind up in the White House, according to anonymous Obama advisors, who seem more credible because they're responding to the earlier story that she was Obama's choice. Jackson might be the Governor's choice, but other frequently mentioned names are Jesse Jackson, Jr. and Tammy Duckworth.

On the outstanding Senate seats, a couple of stories indicate that Obama political operatives are in Georgia to help the Democrat, and that Obama may make an appearance on his behalf for the early December run-off. McCain and maybe Palin may appear for the notorious GOPer incumbent. Meanwhile, Nate Silver figures that Franken has a good chance to win the Minnesota recount after all (it also may not be settled until December), and early signs are that the Democrat may yet triumph in Alaska when more than 90,000 absentee and early votes--something like a third of the total vote--are counted in the increasingly fishy-looking Alaska election. That could happen by the end of this week.

One of the post-election front pages that quickly became keepsakes all over the world. Obama has become something of a savior for print journals in trouble.

Stories

As an adjunct to the televised version (below), Salon asked some of its contributors to write about their experiences on election day.

I've also taken note elsewhere of the boon the Obama election has been to newspapers and magazines, which have seen editions about the Obama victory selling out. It happened especially to big city dailies on Wednesday, and perhaps figuring this out, it happened to the San Francisco Chronicle on Sunday when their front page was full of Obama photos and newspaper front pages from Wednesday. Or so I've heard. Because locally, there wasn't a Chronicle to be found by early afternoon, whereas there were piles and piles of the local daily--with its Obamaless front page.

How It Went Down



Glancing back at pre-election posts, I realized there's no account on this blog of how the election returns actually rolled out. This video compilation by Jed L. provides some idea of the network coverage. Although polls closed in part of Indiana pretty early, the state was a long time in being called. Pennsylvania was the earliest indicator of how it would go, and Ohio was the next really meaningful call--it meant McCain couldn't win. It was California and our west coast states that gave Obama the victory, as soon as our polls closed. Virginia and Florida were called at about the same time, or soon after.

Monday Morning Quarterbacking

That title is painful thanks to the disastrous Steelers game Sunday, but it's apropos.

One big thing happened to the American economy over the weekend, and it happened in China. The huge Chinese stimulus spending plan immediately sent Asian and European markets higher. But it also stole the thunder on the U.S., and ought to be getting wide-eyed attention from U.S. officials, particularly Congress.

About the only comfort the U.S. had was that this economic crisis is shared, especially by China. But such an early and massive step could change that. It should put a lot of pressure on Congress to pass a meaningful and hefty stimulus package, real soon.

As for the general proposition, Monday morning quarterback and Nobel laureate Paul Krugman strongly advises President Obama not to repeat the mistakes of FDR during the Great Depression, which--contrary to CW-- was to create too modest a net stimulus to the economy. While FDR increased federal spending on what we now call infrastructure, for instance, he also increased taxes and didn't help state and local government meet their responsibilities without increasing taxes on their levels.

"My advice to the Obama people is to figure out how much help they think the economy needs, then add 50 percent," Krugman concludes. "It’s much better, in a depressed economy, to err on the side of too much stimulus than on the side of too little. In short, Mr. Obama’s chances of leading a new New Deal depend largely on whether his short-run economic plans are sufficiently bold. Progressives can only hope that he has the necessary audacity."

The Sunday After

There are two types of Sunday columns responding to the Obama election. One is to marvel at it and what it means, as Frank Rich does. They're great, but they do remind me of a curious lack of closure hereabouts. People keep referring to celebrations, dancing in the streets everywhere, a new attitude in the everday world. Once again, this kind of thing passed me by. I detect a smile now and then in response to my Obama cap, but that's about it. If there was dancing in the street here, it was on some other street. But then, I've usually been in the wrong place at the victorious time for this sort of thing. Oh well.

The second type of column outlines the author's agenda for what Obama should or must do, and in what order. Some of these are worthwhile, like Al Gore's on the Climate Crisis and Paul Krugman on the economy. (Okay, that's a Friday column but you get the idea.) Others are the usual special pleadings based on a single issue or on the author's ego--sorry, I meant insights. These are predictable and generally speaking, ignorable.

There is a bit of ugliness in the post-election reaction to Prop 8 in California, which passed a ban on gay marriages (as did two other states.) The vote itself was pretty ugly, assuming it reflects the actual intent of the voters, which given California proposition history is not at all certain. Manipulating the "yes" and "no" has become a high art of the political marketeers who devise these things. But that a first impulse was to immediate blame of African Americans for how they voted was and remains ugly. It does no one credit. And it doesn't help.

On Friday the President-Elect had a brief press conference. A couple of things he said stand out, although I'm not sure that everyone else got the point. The first was that he would proceed with deliberate haste on cabinet appointments--in other words, not be rushed into making them. And in urging Congress to pass a stimulus package, he said that if they didn't in the lame duck session, he would do it immediately after taking office. He didn't say, he would send a stimulus bill to the Hill in January. He said he would get a stimulus package. Maybe the press didn't pick up on this, but I'm guessing that Congress did.

Gossip

Obama has named his economic transition team, with a good mix of members: Clinton stalwarts but also people from business, federal, state and city government. I like seeing Robert Reich on that list. Reich left the Clinton cabinet (Sec. of Labor) due in part to the policies he couldn't support--he was more liberal than the rest of Clinton's economic team as it evolved. That Obama wants his voice in this group is very good, though I doubt Reich will go back to the cabinet (His book on his Clinton admin experiences was called Locked in the Cabinet, after all.)

The only name in this group mentioned in the media as a top contender for Treasury is Lawrence Summers. Ambinder thinks Treasury will come out of this group, and Richard Wolfe on MSNBC talked of Summers as if his appointment is a cinch. But I'm not sure. This could be a panel of advisors--a group of elders. While cabinet posts, especially Treasury, are part policy, part diplomatic jobs (dealing with outside entities), they are also administrative. A younger appointee, like Geithner, appeals to me. If an older guy like Summers does get the job now, I look for a younger #2 there like Geithner, who will be in line to inherit the job in a couple of years. (Possibly the same situation at Defense, if Gates is kept on.)

Rahm Emanuel is officially Obama's chief of staff. Ambinder writes this about what it signals: What does Rahm's selection say about Obama? Obama won't be afraid to step on toes. He's going to be very aggressive in pursuing his agenda. He won't shrink from confronting Congress. And he will expect extreme competence from his staff, from the chief on down.

No surprise if, as suggested, David Axlerod and press secretary Robert Gibb go with Obama to the White House.

I'm warming to the idea of Bill Richardson as Secretary of State. Makes sense in a number of ways, but again the key may be his relationship with Obama, and nobody knows that really, except Obama. It's news to me, for example, that Obama and Emanuel have been so close, but it makes perfect sense that he'd want that for chief of staff. Plus Emanuel's experience in the White House, Congress, business, electoral politics.

Well, that's the gossip and my take on it. It's barely 48 hours after the election was settled, and I'm still sleep deprived and a little numb. But when I switched on the TV today I did get a rush when I first heard the words, "President-elect Obama."

The Cabinet Connection

At this point it's hard to tell which names are serious, which are trial balloons, which are floated to assuage egos and repay debts, and which are fantasies of supporters of the person named, or other unnamed but not actually in the know persons.

But there are names out there for cabinet members, and the ones I'm most interested in are the ones I was hoping to see on Obama's list. Especially Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who would make a terrific appointment to Environmental Protection Agency, but also to head the Dept. of Energy. Caroline Kennedy is also rumored for UN rep or ambassador to the UK (where her grandfather, Joseph P. Kennedy served.) I like the symbolism--Kennedys: The Next Generation. But they both would be really good in those roles. RFK, Jr. would be tenacious. In any case I do hope for a heavy hitter for Energy--somebody with credentials and credibility on the climate crisis as well as green energy.

Of the names being bandied about my instincts say that some are more likely than others (Vilsack at Agriculture, Napolitano as A.G., Geithner at Treasury, Bill Richardson and Chuck Hagel somewhere) but I expect surprises. Somebody from business, and from academia. We don't have to deplete Democrats in Congress or the states. And by the way, cabinet secretaries aren't the only important posts. There are White House advisors, too, which is kind of where I expect Hagel might land. How about several science advisors--like James Hansen of NASA, the most prominent name on Climate Crisis science?

What's got me foxed is the Rahm Emanuel business. Not that he'd be offered the Chief of Staff job, but that it's public, along with the "fact" that he hasn't accepted yet. This is very un-Obamalike, and actually doesn't bode too well for Emanuel. He's sprung a leak even before he's taken the job? Not so good.

Apart from what Michelle's dress was all about at Grant Park (a compromise between Sasha's black and Malia's red?), that's got me mystified.

But what I'm thinking of is this: to this day I can recite for you the entire JFK cabinet, including Postmaster General, which I learned when I was 15. This is a really exciting time to be 15, and to watch a new generation government being formed. At that time, I unrealistically identified with the Kennedy administration--I imagined I was part of it. They cooperated a bit, too--I sent them letters, and got replies like, "The Secretary has carefully considered your letter," and "Your thoughtful letter to the President has been forwarded to the State Department..." I wonder if today's 15 year olds will get that part of the experience.

Now, even though I get emails signed "Barack," I am well aware how distant I am from what's going on in Washington. That's something I will be thinking about further.

Hangover

I didn't get much sleep last night and today is packed with day jobness. But I've got a couple of cautionary thoughts about what we've just experienced.

First, the amount of money binged on this election was obscene. I was part of it this time--for me it was overwhelmingly important to help elect Obama. That his campaign raised so much money from so many small donors is a wonder. But all together, the money it takes to do anything in elections--run as a candidate, back a ballot initiative--is pretty awful. And I don't know how sustainable either. There was enough margin in the system--enough loose change in enough pockets--to do it this time. But this time next year? I doubt it.

Look at all the attention paid to raising money. One of Obama's lesser known advisors, Cass Sunstein, is co-author of a book called Nudge, about "choice architecture," which is a fancy name for a particular kind of marketing, which is by definition a confidence game. The Obama campaign was very good at nudging donations from me. And look at all the money spent here in CA on Prop 8--I think it's like 80 million. It looks like the homophobes won, but however it turns out, you can bet the question is going to be on the ballot next time, and even more money will be spent on it. These are millions that could be going for things that have much more direct effects, with multipliers in terms of the good they do. You can educate kids with that. Fill potholes. Prevent some folks from dying in pain because of inadequate health insurance.

Anyway, it's over for me. If my contributions this year suggest to any pols that I can be nudged again, forget it.

Second, this election night proved once again that when it comes to real time information, the blogosphere is totally dependent on the established information media. I see the chortling on Kos etc. about newspapers losing circulation and in danger of going under. But Kos and the Huffington Post etc. have yet to develop more that supplementary sources of information and modes of gathering and delivering it. They depend on the reporting of media organizations: newspaper and television. And that's true beyond such obvious situations as election night. The blogosphere has done a lot in breaking particular stories, and pushing others until the established media pays attention. But without newspapers in particular, the blogosphere would be little more than unverifiable gossip.

The reason is simple: the blogs don't make enough money to support reporters and a news gathering organization. Very few people can make a living directly from the Internet. Those hoary old newspapers still have union jobs. Does Kos? Meanwhile, the people who write for Huffington are just about all sustained by their newspaper, magazine and TV gigs, and the related income streams of books and paid speeches. Even the big players in the blogosphere depend on books, magazine columns and paid speaking engagements.

Plus there are editors. That's a very mixed blessing, and the blogs do have ways of checking people on their information. But that doesn't always work. There were so many diaries on Kos this election season that purported to be first person reports that could just as easily have been fiction.

The Internet was supposed to be a faster source of election news than TV, radio and newspapers. But those sites that aren't part of established media organizations did little but report what the TV said. And usually, long after they said it. The blogosphere has unique potential and fulfills unique functions, but it has a long way to go to be more than amateur in the gathering and disseminating of timely information.

A sign among the 200,000 or so in and around Grant Park in Chicago, celebrating the victory of President-Elect Barack Obama.

A New Day

It's a new day for America and the world, but it benefits from the past. My two best friends from high school, fellow members of Jr. Teen Dems for Kennedy when we were 14, were doing GOTV on election day, as was I. Margaret remembered Martin Luther King talking about the future he envisioned but might not get to see. I saw Jesse Jackson weeping in the crowd at Grant Park, and I remembered his ground-breaking candidacy especially in 1992 when he was the last Democrat standing except for Bill Clinton in the primaries, and when in the darkest days of Reagan and Bush his message and his slogan was, "Keep hope alive."

Everyone who marched for Civil Rights in the early 60s, or against the war in the late 60s, has to feel they had a part in this, even if that generation--my generation--is reviled as a failure.

Now the Obama administration can not only call on the talents of those who have served in the past, but they can profit from past mistakes. My fellow conspirator in the 1970 antiwar movement at Knox College, John Podesta, is a leader of the transition, and as White House Secretary in Bill Clinton's first term (after leaving the White House, he returned to become Chief of Staff in the second term) he was well positioned to see all the problems in the Clinton transition.

All of this will serve the Obama administration well. But for all the talk about well-known Washington figures, I expect that eventually--if not immediately--we are going to be seeing a new generation in Washington. And that's as it should be. This was a generational election. And for once, America may have gotten a head start on its future. Because the electorate that voted for Obama is much more like America's future than are those who did not.

It's going to be a midwestern administration--perfectly positioned between the West, which is the vanguard of America's future, and the East/Middle Atlantic/South which dominated America's past, but they are transforming as well.

Obama's speech was remarkable for being so consistent with what he has said before, just as his closing argument was very close to his opening argument in the campaign. America might not quite yet know what it's got, but that's only because it's hard to take it in all at once. Obama has been saying it all along.

The numbers aren't all in as I write this, but surely this was a unique election, and a transformative one. We can't yet begin to see what it means. Except one thing: now the future has a chance. It will take a lot of work, but that possibility is something else I was afraid I wouldn't see in my lifetime.

Super Barack!