Obama's First Big-Ticket Item....

Talking to top economic advisors about how we're gonna create jobs, how we get the economy back on track and what do we do in terms of some long-term issues like energy and healthcare. And how do we sequence those things in a way that we can actually get things through Congress?

That's Barack Obama on 60 Minutes, asking himself a few questions about priorities.

A little while later, Obama answers his own question, as Steve Kroft asks him about the importance of shoring up the economy.

Kroft: Does doing something about energy is it less important now than...

Mr. Obama: It's more important. It may be a little harder politically, but it's more important.

Kroft: Why?

Mr. Obama: Well, because this has been our pattern. We go from shock to trance. You know, oil prices go up, gas prices at the pump go up, everybody goes into a flurry of activity. And then the prices go back down and suddenly we act like it's not important, and we start, you know filling up our SUVs again.

And, as a consequence, we never make any progress. It's part of the addiction, all right. That has to be broken. Now is the time to break it.

What this suggests is that the first big-ticket item Obama has decided to purchase is major energy legislation.

Comments

Does it? He took issue with his interviewer assuming that it's not on the agenda, or doesn't have to be, because gas is cheap in a recession. But I didn't hear anything to indicate that this necessarily comes before the automakers, action on foreclosures, health care, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. I'm not arguing that it won't, but I think you're reaching with the Kremlinology here and reading a bit too much into the exchange.

Posted by TH | November 17, 2008 11:37 AM

He made this exact point in the debates too. Energy is first because it's necessary for its own reasons, it pulls us away from foreign oil, and it stimulates green jobs. It's a three for one deal.

Posted by Elrod | November 17, 2008 12:12 PM

Does it? He took issue with his interviewer assuming that it's not on the agenda, or doesn't have to be, because gas is cheap in a recession. But I didn't hear anything to indicate that this necessarily comes before the automakers, action on foreclosures, health care, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.

Yes. Obama has stated repeatedly that a clean energy infrastructure is his number one priority and he views it as part of the massive but necessary spending required because of the financial crisis. If there is a bailout deal for Detroit, it will come with PHEV and V2G strings attached. The energy-climate issue is the overarching problem, it ties into everything else- transportation and thus housing, farm subsidies and thus health care, energy dependence and thus the Middle East, infrastructure and thus domestic manufacturing and job growth.

Posted by Peter | November 17, 2008 12:24 PM

The crisis w/the auto industry, which will be likely boiling over when Obama takes over, gives him the cover to deal with energy and a host of issues.

Dealing w/the auto bailout can come in the form of broader energy reforms and lead easily into a middle class tax cut and stimulus package; as well as health care reform.

Posted by Rhoda | November 17, 2008 12:40 PM

I thought Kroft was asking whether it was "less important" now to deal with energy, given that oil has fallen from a high of $140 a barrel to around $60 a barrel. Obama was responding that it was "more important" with regard to the present price of oil as opposed to "more important" with regard to other national priorities.

This is not to say that Obama doesn't view energy as his first priority regardless, but I don't think his answer to that particular question reflects it.

Posted by Caroline | November 17, 2008 12:56 PM

Smart answer and correctly stated. He sees the pattern of America getting freaked out when prices are high and then forgetting like it never happened when we have a period of relative lower prices and supply. He isn't falling it. Politically it would be easier to do nothing while prices a low and then handle it as a crisis when the prices go back up, but he isn't like that and sees the way out is to start working on it now.

Posted by muffler | November 17, 2008 1:59 PM

Obama's discussion of creating green jobs, updating/creating infrastructure, and stimulus have all lead me to the reasonable conclusion that one of the projects he should consider is a national smart grid a la Gore. This would kill several birds with one stone.

Posted by Joel | November 17, 2008 2:26 PM

Why does everyone seem so baffled by a president-elect with foresight, vision and a plan? Oh, I forgot, George Bush had only eight years plus to develop such skills.

Posted by Agnostic Democrat | November 17, 2008 3:29 PM

He's been saying this exact thing in every debate. I'm glad he's being consistent.

From the second debate transcript:
"OBAMA: We're going to have to prioritize, just like a family has to prioritize. Now, I've listed the things that I think have to be at the top of the list.

Energy we have to deal with today, because you're paying $3.80 here in Nashville for gasoline, and it could go up. And it's a strain on your family budget, but it's also bad for our national security, because countries like Russia and Venezuela and, you know, in some cases, countries like Iran, are benefiting from higher oil prices.

So we've got to deal with that right away. That's why I've called for an investment of $15 billion a year over 10 years. Our goal should be, in 10 year's time, we are free of dependence on Middle Eastern oil...."

(http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/07/presidential.debate.transcript/)

Posted by slag | November 17, 2008 8:00 PM