In the last hundred days, the Obama Administration has:
1) Reversed the Bush Admin policy on stem cell research,
2) Reversed policy on Guantanamo,
3) Developed stimulus legislation designed not merely to introduce capital, but to fundamentally restructure significant sectors of the economy,
4) Expanded S-CHIP,
5) Proposed and implemented a mortgage rescue fund,
6) Proposed significant credit card regulation to prevent predatory practices,
7) Proposed a mammoth budget with significant health care reform as its centerpiece,
8) Managed the DTV transition tolerably well,
9) Begun redeployment of military assets from Iraq to Afghanistan,
10) Reversed Bush Administration determination on greenhouse gasses,
That's off the top of my head. For anyone of these you can argue that it is not going right, he's too timid, he's not going fast enough, he's too protective of incumbent interests, or whatever substantive argument you may have. But it seems a trifle unfair to call this "autopilot."
The process of implementation is further hampered by the inability to fill key political appointments for a variety of reasons (some self-inflicted, others less so). To take one dramatic example, we did not have a Secretary of HHS until today. This nomination was delayed because of conservative opposition to Sebelius' pro-choice positions. The result of this delay has been to significantly hamper the ability of HHS to implement numerous programs, including the existing Swine Flu outbreak.
From where I sit, which is pretty darn close, this Administration has been working along a fairly consistent line of trying to prioritize the economic recovery, staff up with competent individuals while satisfying various political constituencies, while dealing with a variety of divergent crisis. In the last several weeks, we have seen the appointment of a number of critical appointments below the Senate confirmation level that will have significant impact on policy and implementation (to name a few: the appointment of Alec Ross at State, the appointments of Gene Kimmelman and Phil Weiser to the DOJ antitrust division, the appopintment of Jonathan Adelstein to RUS, the appointment of Miriam Shapiro as Assistant USTR, the appointment of Larry Strickling to head NTIA). While I can think of appointments I'm less happy with (the appointment of a number of Jenner & Block lawyers to critical intellectual property enforcement posts), this is consistent with building a generally pro-consumer, pro-tech, pro-science Administration as promised.
Having now gone through three transitions (tail-end of Clinton when I was a wee pup, Bush, and now Obama), I think these guys have handled things pretty well. I also think the Administration has been pretty consistent in its strategy and priorities. I see no sign of the Administration strategy being "cracked." Wrong in spots, IMO, but not "cracked."
Re: Ah, you're missing the point
OK, this usually ends badly, but I will try.
In the last hundred days, the Obama Administration has:
1) Reversed the Bush Admin policy on stem cell research,
2) Reversed policy on Guantanamo,
3) Developed stimulus legislation designed not merely to introduce capital, but to fundamentally restructure significant sectors of the economy,
4) Expanded S-CHIP,
5) Proposed and implemented a mortgage rescue fund,
6) Proposed significant credit card regulation to prevent predatory practices,
7) Proposed a mammoth budget with significant health care reform as its centerpiece,
8) Managed the DTV transition tolerably well,
9) Begun redeployment of military assets from Iraq to Afghanistan,
10) Reversed Bush Administration determination on greenhouse gasses,
That's off the top of my head. For anyone of these you can argue that it is not going right, he's too timid, he's not going fast enough, he's too protective of incumbent interests, or whatever substantive argument you may have. But it seems a trifle unfair to call this "autopilot."
The process of implementation is further hampered by the inability to fill key political appointments for a variety of reasons (some self-inflicted, others less so). To take one dramatic example, we did not have a Secretary of HHS until today. This nomination was delayed because of conservative opposition to Sebelius' pro-choice positions. The result of this delay has been to significantly hamper the ability of HHS to implement numerous programs, including the existing Swine Flu outbreak.
From where I sit, which is pretty darn close, this Administration has been working along a fairly consistent line of trying to prioritize the economic recovery, staff up with competent individuals while satisfying various political constituencies, while dealing with a variety of divergent crisis. In the last several weeks, we have seen the appointment of a number of critical appointments below the Senate confirmation level that will have significant impact on policy and implementation (to name a few: the appointment of Alec Ross at State, the appointments of Gene Kimmelman and Phil Weiser to the DOJ antitrust division, the appopintment of Jonathan Adelstein to RUS, the appointment of Miriam Shapiro as Assistant USTR, the appointment of Larry Strickling to head NTIA). While I can think of appointments I'm less happy with (the appointment of a number of Jenner & Block lawyers to critical intellectual property enforcement posts), this is consistent with building a generally pro-consumer, pro-tech, pro-science Administration as promised.
Having now gone through three transitions (tail-end of Clinton when I was a wee pup, Bush, and now Obama), I think these guys have handled things pretty well. I also think the Administration has been pretty consistent in its strategy and priorities. I see no sign of the Administration strategy being "cracked." Wrong in spots, IMO, but not "cracked."