Obama's 'House Upon A Rock'
华盛顿的各种演讲就像春天的蒲公英一样漫天都是，而且用处也不见得比蒲公英更多。不过，偶尔也会有一场富有启发意义的讲话，值得人们停下来回味。本周白宫就安排了这样一次演讲，奥巴马总统在乔治城大学发表长篇讲话（足足45分钟），希望就他上任87天以来推出的多项经济政策做一全面阐述。周二的讲话实际并未带来什么新消息，也未推出那怕一条新的政策决定。奥巴马谈美国经济美国总统奥巴马谈论了美国目前的经济状况，介绍了这次衰退的独特之处，还谈到了怎样为将来的经济复苏与繁荣建立坚实的基础。不过，通过与白宫官员就这次演讲及其由来进行的谈话来看，这次演讲是了解奥巴马对整顿和重塑美国经济有何理解的最佳窗口。的确，奥巴马总统决定做这次演讲这一事实本身就充分说明，政府认为它眼下需要应对哪些批评意见。如果你错过了演讲，不用担心，你还有机会，这是那种事先就打算了让更多人听到的演讲之一。这次演讲的准备过程并不长。白宫助手说，有关演讲的计划是前一两周才提出来的，主要来自奥巴马在与策略师艾克斯罗德(David Axelrod)首席演讲撰稿人费如(Jon Favreau)交谈中产生的想法。他们认为，有必要以平实的措辞和比喻向公众说明，那些看似相互没有联系的政府经济救助计划的方方面面──银行业救助计划经济刺激计划在伦敦二十国峰会上为从其他国家取得更多合作所作的努力在医疗环保和教育方面投入巨资的新预算等等，实际上都是有机联系在一起的。像其他总统一样，奥巴马也认为他需要通过一个故事来说明这一点。这是我们过去的情况这是我们现在的情况，这是我们将来的情况。奥巴马的一位高级助手说，他对手下人员的指示是：想想炉边谈话。于是，第一个重要的启示就来自演讲本身。对批评政府试图做得太多太快的意见，政府非常敏感，特别是政府在之前的银行业汽车业救助计划和经济刺激计划的巨额开支之外，在医疗卫生和能源方面又增加了大笔开支计划。白宫一位副手说，当预算出来的时候，有很多人表示，“哎哟，他们打算一下子把所有事都做了。”眼下，公众对摊子铺得太大的担忧似乎得到了控制，但这远没到可以忽略的程度。比如琴尼派克大学最近的一项调查显示，59%的美国人表示，他们在许多方面同意总统认为有必要采取“迅速行动”的看法，但35%的人认为他有些“操之过急。”其次，演讲的时机表明，白宫走到了一个转折点。奥巴马本月初的二十国峰会之旅在许多方面标志着已经结束了其经济救助策略的开始阶段。它的所有牌都亮了出来。白宫目前的挑战是维持对他们的政治支持，特别是让持怀疑态度的议员们相信，医疗卫生和能源方面的重大措施实际上是经济救助计划的一部分，与后者并无冲突。然后，白宫需要的是提出一个统一的经济理论。奥巴马描述了这样一个美国：在最近十年左右时间里，它发展出一种他所称的“泡沫-破灭经济”，在这个经济中，有40%的企业利润来自金融领域，而制造业却被螺旋式上升的医疗成本所阻碍，这些成本给现有企业和他们的员工造成了沉重负担。因此，奥巴马在演讲中将美国经济描述为一幢危房。实际上，奥巴马是用银行救助计划和刺激开支计划（现在称为“复苏计划”）作为一种灭火器，来扑灭这房子顶楼的火焰，同时，派人用新的教育医疗卫生能源的基石重建下面的基础。这里的思路是，一旦火焰熄灭，美国会发现，这房子的基础搞得更坚实了──用联邦资金在替代能源行业创造了大量的新就业机会，同时，通过减轻现有行业的医疗成本负担，挽救原有的工作岗位。奥巴马在演讲中所用的比喻是这样一所房子──《圣经》中的房子。他引用的是“登山宝训”的故事，里面说，建在沙上的房子会倒，建在岩石上的房子依然屹立。至于在此过程中积累的赤字，它们属于工地上的废料，在这些工程完成后，随着经济增长更强劲，它们将会被清理干净。至少理论是这样的。“邪恶轴心”原本只是一篇演讲中的一个词，但它后来被用来总结上一任总统的外交政策。随着时间的推移，也许，我们将看到“岩石上的房屋”像白宫希望的那样，成为奥巴马经济政策的代名词。Gerald F. Seib（编者按：本文作者Gerald F. Seib是《华尔街日报》助理总编兼华盛顿分社执行编辑。）相关阅读奥巴马描绘持久复苏前景 2009-04-14奥巴马政府在人民币问题上软化立场 2009-04-16奥巴马考虑简化退税程序 2009-04-16奥巴马一年挣多少钱？ 2009-04-16奥巴马公布庞大交通投资计划 2009-04-16
Speeches pop up in Washington like dandelions in the spring, and often are no more useful. But occasionally there comes a speech that is revealing, and worth pausing to absorb.Such a speech came this week when the White House created an audience at Georgetown University so President Barack Obama could deliver a long address (exactly 45 minutes) designed to explain the thinking behind the many economic policies he has poured out over the last 87 days. Tuesday's speech actually broke no news; not a single new policy decision was revealed.Yet talks with White House officials about the speech and its origins suggest it's the best look yet into how the president thinks he's both fixing and reshaping the American economy. Indeed, the fact that President Obama chose to give the speech at all tells much about which critiques the administration thinks it needs to counter.If you missed it -- well, you didn't. This was one of those speeches designed as much to be read later by a wider audience as listened to by those who heard it. A text is posted on the Capital Journal blog, http://blogs.wsj.com/capitaljournal/.It wasn't long in the making. The plan for the speech arose only in the last week or two, White House aides say, principally out of conversations between the president, strategist David Axelrod and chief speechwriter Jon Favreau. They saw a need to explain, in simple terms and metaphors, how the seemingly disjointed pieces of the administration's economic rescue package -- the bank bailout, the economic stimulus package, the attempt to get more cooperation from other countries at the Group of 20 summit in Europe, the new budget with big chunks of money for health, environment and education -- are supposed to fit together.Like other presidents, Mr. Obama decided he needed to do that by telling a story: This is where we were, this is where we are, this is where we're going. Mr. Obama's instruction to his staff, one senior aide says, was: 'Think fireside chat.'Thus, the first important revelation arises from the very existence of the speech. The administration is sensitive to the criticism that it is trying to do too much too fast -- and in particular that its proposals for health and energy pile too much spending on top of big bills already accumulating for bank and auto bailouts and economic stimulus. 'When the budget came out, there was a lot of, 'Oh, they're trying to do everything all at once,'' says one White House aide.Right now, public fears of overreach seem to be under control, but they aren't far beneath the surface. A recent Quinnipiac University survey, for example, found that 59% of Americans say they agree with the president on the need for 'swift action' on many fronts, but 35% think he is trying to do 'too much too soon.'Second, the speech's timing indicates the White House has reached a turning point. Mr. Obama's trip to the G-20 summit meeting this month in many ways marked the end of the opening phase of his economic rescue strategy. All its pieces now are on the table. The White House challenge now lies in maintaining political support for them -- particularly convincing lawmakers skeptical that big health and energy initiatives actually are part of the economic rescue, not at odds with it.What the White House needed, then, was to present a unified theory of economics. Enter the speech. In it, Mr. Obama describes a nation that has developed in the last decade or so what he called a 'bubble and bust economy,' in which 40% of corporate profits have come from the financial sector, while the sectors that actually make things are increasingly held back by spiraling health-care costs that weigh down existing companies and their workers.So the speech portrays the economy as a house in trouble. Mr. Obama is, in essence, using bank bailouts and stimulus spending (which now is called 'the recovery plan') as a kind of fire extinguisher to douse financial flames on the top floor of the house, while simultaneously dispatching work crews to put new education, health and energy stones in place to rebuild the foundation down below.The idea is that once the flames are out, the country will discover that the house's foundation has been made stronger by using federal dollars to create a whole raft of new jobs in an alternative energy industry, while saving old jobs by lightening the burden of health costs on existing industries.The metaphor President Obama used in the speech is, in fact, that of a house -- a Biblical house. He refers to the story from the Sermon on the Mount about how houses built on sand fall, while those built on rock remain standing.As for deficits that accumulate during the work -- well, they are the construction debris that will have to be cleared out, with the help of stronger economic growth, after the project is finished.That's the theory, at least. 'Axis of evil' was just a line in a speech, but it came to define the last president's foreign policy. Time will tell whether 'our house upon a rock' will, as the White House hopes, define this president's economic strategy.Gerald F. Seib
Speeches pop up in Washington like dandelions in the spring, and often are no more useful. But occasionally there comes a speech that is revealing, and worth pausing to absorb.Such a speech came this week when the White House created an audience at Georgetown University so President Barack Obama could deliver a long address (exactly 45 minutes) designed to explain the thinking behind the many economic policies he has poured out over the last 87 days. Tuesday's speech actually broke no news; not a single new policy decision was revealed.Yet talks with White House officials about the speech and its origins suggest it's the best look yet into how the president thinks he's both fixing and reshaping the American economy. Indeed, the fact that President Obama chose to give the speech at all tells much about which critiques the administration thinks it needs to counter.If you missed it -- well, you didn't. This was one of those speeches designed as much to be read later by a wider audience as listened to by those who heard it. A text is posted on the Capital Journal blog, http://blogs.wsj.com/capitaljournal/.It wasn't long in the making. The plan for the speech arose only in the last week or two, White House aides say, principally out of conversations between the president, strategist David Axelrod and chief speechwriter Jon Favreau. They saw a need to explain, in simple terms and metaphors, how the seemingly disjointed pieces of the administration's economic rescue package -- the bank bailout, the economic stimulus package, the attempt to get more cooperation from other countries at the Group of 20 summit in Europe, the new budget with big chunks of money for health, environment and education -- are supposed to fit together.Like other presidents, Mr. Obama decided he needed to do that by telling a story: This is where we were, this is where we are, this is where we're going. Mr. Obama's instruction to his staff, one senior aide says, was: 'Think fireside chat.'Thus, the first important revelation arises from the very existence of the speech. The administration is sensitive to the criticism that it is trying to do too much too fast -- and in particular that its proposals for health and energy pile too much spending on top of big bills already accumulating for bank and auto bailouts and economic stimulus. 'When the budget came out, there was a lot of, 'Oh, they're trying to do everything all at once,'' says one White House aide.Right now, public fears of overreach seem to be under control, but they aren't far beneath the surface. A recent Quinnipiac University survey, for example, found that 59% of Americans say they agree with the president on the need for 'swift action' on many fronts, but 35% think he is trying to do 'too much too soon.'Second, the speech's timing indicates the White House has reached a turning point. Mr. Obama's trip to the G-20 summit meeting this month in many ways marked the end of the opening phase of his economic rescue strategy. All its pieces now are on the table. The White House challenge now lies in maintaining political support for them -- particularly convincing lawmakers skeptical that big health and energy initiatives actually are part of the economic rescue, not at odds with it.What the White House needed, then, was to present a unified theory of economics. Enter the speech. In it, Mr. Obama describes a nation that has developed in the last decade or so what he called a 'bubble and bust economy,' in which 40% of corporate profits have come from the financial sector, while the sectors that actually make things are increasingly held back by spiraling health-care costs that weigh down existing companies and their workers.So the speech portrays the economy as a house in trouble. Mr. Obama is, in essence, using bank bailouts and stimulus spending (which now is called 'the recovery plan') as a kind of fire extinguisher to douse financial flames on the top floor of the house, while simultaneously dispatching work crews to put new education, health and energy stones in place to rebuild the foundation down below.The idea is that once the flames are out, the country will discover that the house's foundation has been made stronger by using federal dollars to create a whole raft of new jobs in an alternative energy industry, while saving old jobs by lightening the burden of health costs on existing industries.The metaphor President Obama used in the speech is, in fact, that of a house -- a Biblical house. He refers to the story from the Sermon on the Mount about how houses built on sand fall, while those built on rock remain standing.As for deficits that accumulate during the work -- well, they are the construction debris that will have to be cleared out, with the help of stronger economic growth, after the project is finished.That's the theory, at least. 'Axis of evil' was just a line in a speech, but it came to define the last president's foreign policy. Time will tell whether 'our house upon a rock' will, as the White House hopes, define this president's economic strategy.Gerald F. Seib