Academic

The Geithner Alone Story as Media Criticism

By Gordon Smith, Christine, Hurt, Vic Fleischer, Fred Tung, Lisa Fairfax, David Zaring

When it isn't greasing sources, the Times sometimes has its reporters read a few other stories, and then, if they like them, to rewrite them for posterity.  The Geithner-doesn't-have-enough-political-help story is an example.  It appeared on ABC yesterday, the L.A. Times on February 25, and in the Associated Press (the AP!) three days ago.  Not that you'd know that from the Times story.

But is it true?  Geithner does have fifty politicals at Treasury, Neel Kashkari is still on the job, and those thousands of civil servants must be good for something.  And so in addition to the headline "Geithner, With Few Aides, Faces Challenges," there is this walkback:

By any normal measure, Treasury officials have been remarkably productive. In the last month alone, Mr. Geithner announced the outlines of a $2.5 trillion bank rescue plan; detailed a $275 billion plan to help homeowners with their mortgages; created a ?stress test? to determine whether banks can withstand a serious downturn; and issued restrictions on executive pay at banks that receive federal money.... Treasury officials have played a central role in fashioning Mr. Obama?s budget ? especially the tax portions, which would raise $1 trillion over the next 10 years, mostly through higher taxes on the wealthy and corporations. And Mr. Geithner was central in persuading Congress to free up the second $350 billion for the Treasury?s financial rescue program.

That is a lot of stuff to do.  And in these challenging economic times, it is hardly surprising that the people there are working late.  So does that mean this is one of those DC stories completely without foundation?  No.  As the Times knows, sometimes the best analysis is comparative:

It is crazy that Treasury has no number 2, and that Annette Nazareth, who was confirmable enough to be on the SEC until recently, withdrew her nomination to the position - allegedly because she was going to face opposition on capital hill for not doing a better job with the SEC, which sounds fishy.

Full post as published by Conglomerate on March 09, 2009 (boomark / email).