ABC and CBS's morning shows on Wednesday both provided surprisingly tough questioning to Christina Romer, one of Barack Obama's economic advisors. On the issue of health care, Good Morning America co-host Diane Sawyer compared the costs of Medicare to the new health care plan and pointed out past government inaccuracies when it came to accessing cost.
She grilled, "You know, in 1965, everyone was told that over 25 years, the cost of Medicare would be $12 billion. The actual cost, $107 billion." Sawyer added, "Ten-times what the estimate was. Can you know this cost? And can you guarantee it's not going to be more than the administration believes?" Early Show co-host Maggie Rodriguez quizzed Romer, the Chairwoman of the President's Council of Economic Advisors, on Obama's repeated insistence that he has no interest in meddling in the private sector. She wondered, "He sounds like he's being forced to do these things. If he believes that big government is actually a bad thing, why doesn't he at least try less intrusive options, which are certainly be offered up?"
After Romer responded with a talking point about how the status quo "can't remain," Rodriguez pressed, "But why not start less aggressively?" Regarding the issue of new government regulatory reform for the credit card and mortgage industry, the CBS host queried, "How can the consumer feel confident in – in trusting such a controversial proposal when, for example, the President conceded yesterday that unemployment will hit 10 percent, when the administration had predicted that if we passed the stimulus, it wouldn't go over eight percent?"
On the issue of new regulations for credit cards, GMA's Sawyer challenged, "And does it mean that you can run up a high bill, a high debt on your credit card and effect government protection?" She also speculated that such legislation could lead to "second guessing the banks, the mortgage industry."
Romer appeared unprepared for this hardball from Sawyer on a proposed health care overhaul:
DIANE SAWYER: Turning for a moment to health care, if I can, this morning. The Congressional Budget Office, as we know, issued a report which created kind of a bombshell about Senator Kennedy's bill, which is the leading Democratic bill at this point. Saying that not only would it be the huge cost over ten years, but at the end of the day, you'd still have, net, 36 million people who wouldn't be covered. Even Senator Dodd said he was concerned and surprised by those numbers and he helped draft the bill.
CHRISTINA ROMER: So- the crucial thing- Last Monday, the President gave his vision of health care reform. And here I just have to tell you, do you notice how health care reform and financial regulatory reform, sort of all go together. This is the President's theme of not only getting through this crisis, but coming through stronger. A new foundation for the economy. And he laid forth principles, such as making sure we contain cost growth. Expanding coverage. And put some very concrete proposals on the tables.
NBC's Today show also featured an interview with Romer, but it was brief and amounted to only one clip of the official explaining the administration's regulatory plans. News anchor Ann Curry did label the proposal a "tough sell" in Congress.
It's unclear what prompted such skeptical inquiries from CBS and ABC hosts, but more of this type of actual journalism would certainly be appreciated by many Americans.
A transcript of the June 17 GMA and Early show interviews can be found below:
Good Morning America
7:03
SAWYER: And we followed up on this a few minutes ago, when, from Washington, we talked to Dr. Christina Romer, who is chairwoman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers. So, as we heard Jake Tapper say, this could be a real challenge up on Capitol Hill, with a lot of people saying these enormous, new regulations could intrude into every part of the commercial financial world. Second guessing the banks, the mortgage industry. What's your response?
ROMER (Chair, Council of Economic Advisors): I think the key thing to say is that the status quo is not an option. One of the things that we've seen from the crisis that we've been going through is that there were gaps. There were failures in our regulatory system. And we need to make it better. What we're proposing is an important overhaul, the biggest overhaul since the Great Depression.
SAWYER: If I can bring it down to the consumer for a moment. There's one quote I noticed in the paper this morning, saying that the consumer protections would, in effect, be deciding how people live. Not just how people get to decide for themselves. And the question is, take credit cards alone. What will be new for the consumer on credit cards? What would you prevent? And does it mean that you can run up a high bill, a high debt on your credit card and effect government protection?
ROMER: No. Very much what the new Consumer Financial Protection Agency is supposed to do is to really watch out for all the ways in which consumers borrow. You know, we have a lot of those regulations today. They're just kind of spread around to a lot of different agencies, a lot of different regulators. Very much what our proposal says is, the consumer deserves one agency, whose only job is to watch out for them.
SAWYER: Turning for a moment to health care, if I can, this morning. The Congressional Budget Office, as we know, issued a report which created kind of a bombshell about Senator Kennedy's bill, which is the leading Democratic bill at this point. Saying that not only would it be the huge cost over ten years, but at the end of the day, you'd still have, net, 36 million people who wouldn't be covered. Even Senator Dodd said he was concerned and surprised by those numbers and he helped draft the bill.
ROMER: So- the crucial thing- Last Monday, the President gave his vision of health care reform. And here I just have to tell you, do you notice how health care reform and financial regulatory reform, sort of all go together. This is the President's theme of not only getting through this crisis, but coming through stronger. A new foundation for the economy. And he laid forth principles, such as making sure we contain cost growth. Expanding coverage. And put some very concrete proposals on the tables.
SAWYER: Members of Congress, though, like House Minority Leader John Boehner have said, whatever is being said, the costs are unknowable and going to be astronomical. And there's a cautionary tale in Medicare. We went back to look. You know, in 1965, everyone was told that over 25 years, the cost of Medicare would be $12 billion. [ABC graphics appear onscreen showing disparity.] The actual cost, $107 billion. Ten-times what the estimate was. Can you know this cost? And can you guarantee it's not going to be more than the administration believes?
ROMER: Of course, you can't ever know the future. What the President, though, has said is, we're absolutely going to pay for this thing. Any health reform that we do, absolutely can't grow the deficit in the short-run. And it needs to make the fundamental kind of reforms that will slow the growth of costs in the long run, because that's the thing that's fundamentally going to bring down the budget deficit, eventually.
The Early Show
7:03
MAGGIE RODRIGUEZ: Joining us now, also from Washington, is Christina Romer, she is the chair of the White House Counsel of Economic Advisers. Dr. Romer, good morning.
CHRISTINA ROMER: Good morning. Great to be here.
RODRIGUEZ: Thanks for being here. For the people at home wondering ‘how will this help me?,’ can you give us a nutshell answer in layman's terms please.
ROMER: Absolutely. I think there are two crucial things it will do. One, it’s going to make our economy, our financial institutions, more stable. That is a big goal of the President. You’ve seen really a theme the last several weeks of the new foundations, sort of coming through this crisis stronger and healthier. Health reform is part of that. Financial regulatory reform is part of that, to really make it so that our financial institutions are more, you know, are less risky, more stable. So that's going to be crucial for all of us, because we know that financial crises are terrible for the overall economy. And then for individuals, the new Consumer Financial Protection Agency is really going to take all of those consumer regulations and put them into one place, so that there’s one agency whose only job it is, is to watch out for consumers, the deceptive practices, transparency, making sure there is a plain vanilla option, even when there are more complicated ones. All of that’s going to be great for the consumer.
RODRIGUEZ: But this all comes with a lot of government intervention, which the President said yesterday, is not ideally what he would like to be doing. And that reminded me of when GM – the government took a majority stake in GM and he said that he was a reluctant shareholder. He's talking like somebody whose hands are tied. He sounds like he's being forced to do these things. If he believes that big government is actually a bad thing, why doesn't he at least try less intrusive options, which are certainly be offered up.
ROMER: You know, the crucial thing is that the status quo can't remain. What we’ve seen from the-
RODRIGUEZ: But why not start less aggressively?
ROMER: I think the truth is we are striking a really appropriate balance. We are not bulldozing the whole system. We're very much starting wh the regulatory structure we have and improving it. The other thing that's important, you know, you mentioned using less intrusive. Well, one of the key things that the President’s going to be talking about are higher capital requirements, that’s a very sensible, kind of market-braced – market-based approach that says, ‘let's make sure that the firms making decisions have money on the table so that they don't take excessive risks.’ So that they are there to absorb the first losses. And that's incredibly important.
RODRIGUEZ: Dr. Romer, you said it's not a bulldozer, but it is the most sweeping reform in 70 years. How can the consumer feel confident in – in trusting such a controversial proposal when, for example, the President conceded yesterday that unemployment will hit 10 percent, when the administration had predicted that if we passed the stimulus, it wouldn't go over eight percent?
ROMER: You know, the crucial thing is the consumer, when you mentioned the – what may happen to the unemployment rate. One of the crucial things that we know caused the mess that we’re in now is lax financial regulation, firms falling through the gap, the fact that we don't have resolution authority now. So when we have a big firm like AIG that gets into trouble, we don't have the tools for dealing with it. So the crucial thing is to actually make sure we don't face this kind of crisis again. That's the number one thing that’s going to be good for American families and the whole American economy.
—Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center.





MAGGIE RODRIGUEZ: Joining us now, also from Washington, is Christina Romer, she is the chair of the White House Counsel of Economic Advisers. Dr. Romer, good morning.














Editor at Large
Comments Policy
All I can guess is that
June 17, 2009 - 14:22 ET by Chris NormanAll I can guess is that they were having flashbacks to when they were real journalists. They actually asked some tough, although belated, questions which will probably be never asked again. Romer's answers were a train wreck. Could anyone match her gibberishistic "answers" to the questions if one didn't follow the other?
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
Urgent
June 17, 2009 - 14:27 ET by tonyrich300You need to watch this
http://www.youtube.c...
Stop already
June 17, 2009 - 18:15 ET by RukusNB doesn't need to watch that, you need to stop spamming the threads. Sheesh!
Turtle turtle!
Gary
The answer is clear, and it mixes well with orange juice! - My Dad
And that's my excuse! - Me
That youtube link was trash, not "URGENT"
June 18, 2009 - 11:50 ET by pockets64Don't bother wasting your time watching that youtube link. It's Big Ed proving his msnbc heritage by professing that Cheney wants a terrorist attack on the US.
How one goes from hearing a person defend 7 years of a policy that protected our nation from attacks to "this guy is just a power-hungry nub who is trying to protect his back side from war crimes charges and he wants to see Obama fail" is beyond me. If you're going to get creative and spear someone, keep it to a single line of attack, for crying out loud!!
Apparently it was "URGENT"
June 18, 2009 - 11:55 ET by SickofLibsApparently it was "URGENT" to him, as he posted the exact same thing on at least 10 different threads.
Don't confuse a moment of
June 17, 2009 - 14:29 ET by dscottDon't confuse a moment of political clarity and pragmatism with concern for the public. The MSM at this point has read the writing on the wall as far as the public is concerned for healthcare reform, deficit spending and the upcoming contraction of credit card issuance by the banks. They know this will all come together and crush Obama and the liberal agenda if they don't help Obama back pedal real, real quick. This is a MSM signal to the Dems they need to change course and hope the public doesn't blame them for having the audacity for screwing things up by moving so "boldly".
You may think my interpretation of events here is cynical but it's not, a leopard doesn't change it's spots, it merely moves to a different patch of the thicket to hide it's moves. The 2010 elections are coming up and they don't want a repeat of 1994 with the Contract with America.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
Baucus To Chop $600B From Health Care Bill
June 17, 2009 - 14:43 ET by JDWYou are right.
The news media media sees the bumps in the road.
They have to protect what they can for upcoming elections for their party.
JDW
DAILY WAVE
When people fear their government there is tyranny.
When government fears the people there is liberty.
Happyland strikes again
June 17, 2009 - 14:35 ET by UnsaneThere are WAAAAYYY too many people out there who simply expect and demand that the government baby them. The government, to far too many people out there, be they readers or posters, is a big nanny that should be out to pamper and coddle them.
Check out this story for a glimpse as to why having the government provide things for you (that you should be adult enough to manage to get on your own) is not a good idea. Be sure to share it with friends and spread it far and wide.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
Well America,
June 17, 2009 - 14:38 ET by DelsaSOBama and the rest of us up here don't like the "status quo"
so F' YOU !
That is what I got out of Rommer or whatever her name is?
dr. romer has her doctorate
June 17, 2009 - 15:02 ET by larry on LIin prestidigitation,instead of hand she uses words, pure B.Ss. she did the same song and dance on fox yesterday.
She's going old school
June 17, 2009 - 17:36 ET by gmaniac1She's going old school using the word "crucial" so much. What's next? Is she going to be getting all "chronic?"
When the people fear the government it's called tyranny, when the government fears the people it's called liberty!
LOL!
June 17, 2009 - 18:17 ET by RukusNowadays that would be 'emo'! : )
Gary
The answer is clear, and it mixes well with orange juice! - My Dad
And that's my excuse! - Me
She comes across as not
June 17, 2009 - 19:53 ET by kgShe comes across as not quite the sharpest tool in the shed.
"DumbAssity of Dope"
These Lib talking heads
June 17, 2009 - 20:16 ET by RR GOPThese Lib talking heads just smell more taxes coming their way.
Certainly not an ideological thing nor a sudden urge to actually engage in their supposed profession-journalism.
One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 61% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory (yep...approval for Congress now at 39%...do you believe that!?).
Romer is a great regurgitator of advertising slogans, but
June 17, 2009 - 23:31 ET by Systems AnalystI noticed that at no time did she actually say anything that could be considered relevant to the questions asked, or even to contain information. Some news person somewhere is eventually going to have to say, "Those are some very nice slogans, but I asked you how this program is supposed to help the average person. Could you respond intelligently, please?"
I agree
June 18, 2009 - 11:19 ET by StarAZI totally agree with the above post...Saying, "the status quo is not an option" is not an answer and is of course a lie, too--of course, we could maintain the status quo--it would cost less than the trill and a half of this so-far half-conceived whatever they are calling reform.
State run media questions administration
June 18, 2009 - 09:00 ET by east tennessee johnsome in the state controlled media actually read the polls, the ones they don't generate, really read the ratings and the decline in their and the print media's audience, and offer this up as a "proof" of objectivity by questioning an member of the administration. They'll hold this up as prime example #1 of their objectivity. It's merely window dressing. Afterall, who actually saw either interview? The true test comes when they have the guts and nerve to ask Comrade O such questions. Don't hold your breath.
The uh's woulld be droning out
June 18, 2009 - 11:17 ET by StarAZIf they ask their god these questions, wait for the strings of uh's.... I think this rather mild questioning tone that is now masquerading as journalism, is to back off from being his total butt boy with the in-White House newscast and the "Seven in One Blow" amazement that the president is quicker than a fly.
I couldn't believe it...my
June 18, 2009 - 11:30 ET by motherbeltI couldn't believe it...my daughter called me from Philly airport today and apparently CNN is STILL talking about the damn fly!
As for the "Karate Kid" references.....did Obama catch it with chopsticks?
I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson
But what about the poor?
June 18, 2009 - 11:58 ET by pockets64Several years ago I was visiting my the left branch of my family tree. We got to discussing economics. I made a comment about not appreciating my money being taken from me and given to others.
The response: "But what about the pooer?"
They can get a job just like I did.
When I got a family, I made sure I had health insurance. When it was just me, I didn't care. I have tended to my credit. Paid my mortgage. It is no one else's responsibilty but my own.
When I signed a contract, it was up to me to read the fine print. It was up to me to make sure I paid my credit card bills on time so they wouldn't jack up my rates as they promised they would in my contract. It was up to me to make sure I paid my mortgage on time so they wouldn't kick my family out onto the streets.
For those of us still with jobs, the key to keeping a job is to 1) keep your nose to the grindstone, 2) keep your ear to the ground, and 3) keep your ear to the air. When you hear the rumblings and smell the smoke, pop your parachute and find a new job.
You don't want to be one of the hundreds from your company looking for a job at the same time, no matter how good you are. The folks doing the hiring can't always tell a good person's resume from a bad one's.