John McCain and Barack Obama both have official responses up to the Lehman collapse, and McCain’s is much better than Obama’s: shorter, punchier, more to the point. I score it 6-0 to McCain.
McCain first:
The crisis in our financial markets has taken an enormous toll on our economy and the American people — first the decline of our housing markets followed by the collapse of Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and now Lehman Brothers. I am glad to see that the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department have said no to using taxpayer money to bailout Lehman Brothers, a position I have spoken about throughout this campaign. We are carefully monitoring the financial markets, including the duress at Lehman Brothers that is the latest reminder of ineffective regulation and management. Efforts must also be focused on ensuring that the deposits of hardworking Americans are protected.
He’s right about the lack of a bailout being a good thing (+1). He’s right that Lehman’s collapse is the result of ineffective regulation and management (+1). But there’s really no risk to any deposits here, and I don’t think it’s helpful to imply that there might be (-1).
It is essential for us to make sure that the U.S. remains the pre-eminent financial market of the world. This will be a highest priority of my Administration. In order to do this, major reform must be made in Washington and on Wall Street. We cannot tolerate a system that handicaps our markets and our banks and places at risk the savings of hard-working Americans and investors. The McCain-Palin Administration will replace the outdated and ineffective patchwork quilt of regulatory oversight in Washington and bring transparency and accountability to Wall Street. We will rebuild confidence in our markets and restore our leadership in the financial world.
It’s good that McCain is focused on America’s financial competitiveness (+1). It’s good that he wants to reform Washington and Wall Street (+1). But the system as it stands neither handicaps the markets — if anything, it gives them too much free rein — nor places at risk investors’ savings (-2). Big points though for putting forward a substantive policy which would actually address what happened this weekend: reforming the regulatory system (+4). And of course rebuilding confidence is key (+1).
Overall score for McCain, then: +6.
On to Obama:
This morning we woke up to some very serious and troubling news from Wall Street.
This morning? What about yesterday morning, or the morning before that? Are you on top of this, Barack? (-1)
The situation with Lehman Brothers and other financial institutions is the latest in a wave of crises that are generating enormous uncertainty about the future of our financial markets. This turmoil is a major threat to our economy and its ability to create good-paying jobs and help working Americans pay their bills, save for their future, and make their mortgage payments.
Yes, this is the latest in a wave of crises, it’s good to put this in context (+1). But I’m not sure how much effect the financial crisis is having on the ability of working Americans to get good-paying jobs and make their mortgage payments (0).
The challenges facing our financial system today are more evidence that too many folks in Washington and on Wall Street weren’t minding the store. Eight years of policies that have shredded consumer protections, loosened oversight and regulation, and encouraged outsized bonuses to CEOs while ignoring middle-class Americans have brought us to the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression.
"Weren’t minding the store" means "not enough regulation", which is true (+1). But there isn’t visibly less regulation now than there was eight years ago (-1), and none of this crisis has anything to do with executive pay, not that high bonuses were a function of government policies either (-1). And talking about the Great Depression? The current recession is serious, but it’s not that serious. There’s no perspective here (-1).
I certainly don’t fault Senator McCain for these problems, but I do fault the economic philosophy he subscribes to. It’s a philosophy we’ve had for the last eight years – one that says we should give more and more to those with the most and hope that prosperity trickles down to everyone else. It’s a philosophy that says even common-sense regulations are unnecessary and unwise, and one that says we should just stick our heads in the sand and ignore economic problems until they spiral into crises.
The economic policy of the past eight years did not cause this financial crisis (-1). But yes we need more common-sense regulations (+1).
Well now, instead of prosperity trickling down, the pain has trickled up – from the struggles of hardworking Americans on Main Street to the largest firms of Wall Street.
Cute rhetoric (+1), but not really based in reality: the problems started on Wall Street, not on Main Street (-1).
This country can’t afford another four years of this failed philosophy. For years, I have consistently called for modernizing the rules of the road to suit a 21st century market – rules that would protect American investors and consumers. And I’ve called for policies that grow our economy and our middle-class together. That is the change I am calling for in this campaign, and that is the change I will bring as President.
It’s far from clear what Obama means by "modernizing the rules of the road," but let’s give him some benefit of the doubt and assume he’s talking about the same kind of regulatory reform that McCain was nodding at (+3). Still, I don’t want American investors to be protected: they should be risk-takers, and not be backstopped by the government (-1). As for "policies that grow our economy", that’s just empty rhetoric (0).
Total for Obama: 0. At least he’s not negative.
Overall, I think that Matt Cooper is right that this crisis should be a net positive for Obama. But the crisis was caused by Wall Street, which is pretty much the archetypal East Coast elite — and I suspect that in power, Obama will be friendlier to Wall Street than McCain would be. Not that that’s necessarily a bad thing, of course.
(Via Moss)