Obama Should Make Use of Romney's Considerable Talents

Friday, December 28, 2012

President Barack Obama had a promised White House lunch a while back with his campaign opponent.

The private one-hour meeting was not covered by intrusive television cameras. Only one photo of them shaking hands was provided to press and nation.

At his first press conference since he was re-elected, Obama had mentioned that Romney's success in turning around the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics had impressed him. That comment hinted that there might be an opportunity for them to cooperate for the common good.

After the bruising 1960 election, John F. Kennedy graciously offered a federal appointment to the loser, Vice President Richard M. Nixon. They'd both served in Congress since 1946 and were personal friends although opposites in political outlook and style. Nixon declined JFK's offer.

One wonders if, rather than re-entering the world of private capital, Romney might welcome an important public challenge. Although for Romney, his wife and family, the prospects of again being in the public arena might seem too daunting, one senses in Romney a compelling need to serve the nation in some constructive way.

The big question is: Why would President Obama wish to reward his recent detractor with vital official responsibilities? To understand the answer to that riddle, one must consider how Obama's mind works. Would he be comfortable with the most nationally prominent Republican in the land, albeit a badly wounded one, being within his tent? Or more to the point, does he trust the man?

My sense is that President Obama is pragmatic enough not to harbor grudges of past slights if there's a grand national purpose to be achieved. What might that be? Perhaps long-needed comprehensive reorganization of the executive branch.

Politically, the timing could be auspicious; one cannot remember a more toxic time of nasty partisan wrangling, particularly goaded on by tea party extremists who still infect Congress. A purely nonpartisan endeavor might help quiet that rancorous crowd.

With persistent calls for massive cuts in government spending, a comprehensive plan of administrative reorganization designed by citizens with no ax to grind just might give comfort to those on both sides of the aisle looking for smart new solutions and someone to blame for the suggestions rendered.

There are ample precedents for this idea. President William Howard Taft set up the Commission on Economy and Efficiency, and President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, at the height of the Great Depression, established the Commission on Administrative Management to address the "Topsy-like growth of government."

A more inspired move was made by President Harry S. Truman, who invited former President Herbert Hoover to head the Commission on Organization of the Executive Branch in 1947. Hoover was a brilliant choice, lending conservative testimonial value to the commission's conclusions while allaying suspicions of those who'd be quick to smell a New Deal or Fair Deal whitewash.

After leaving office, a defeated Hoover had been neglected by fellow Republicans, reviled by Democrats, and ignored by FDR. No-nonsense Harry Truman trusted the former president and admired his knowledge of government and management. He respected Hoover's unselfish record of serving the nation. Truman's simple charge: "promote economy, efficiency and improved service."

The 12-man commission appointed by Congress set up 24 task forces and hired 300 experts from public life, academia and business. It made 277 specific recommendations. Administrative action carried out 114 of them; new legislation was required to carry out 106 more. Commissioners unanimously concluded that the president should have "more power over administration, not less."

It found that 65 departments, administrations, agencies and boards were reporting directly to the president, and recommended that be changed. It urged the Cabinet be more helpful to the chief executive, and even suggested reorganization of Congress.

The press heralded the commission as "nonpartisan" after it had carried out the most extensive investigation in American history. It achieved administrative efficiency and genuine savings. A subsequent Junior Hoover Commission was praised for its good governance recommendations.

Does Romney have the wisdom and devotion to country that Hoover showed in 1947 and throughout his lifetime? I think he does. Does Obama have reason to trust Romney to act in a nonpartisan manner as head of such a commission? That's the big question.

Safeguards can be put in place. When Congress authorized the Hoover Commission, the Senate, House of Representatives and president each selected four members. Half had to be from private life. It was designed that way to ensure close executive-legislative cooperation once recommendations were made. It achieved those ends.

Mitt Romney can lick his wounds in Bermuda, the Caymans or in Washington, D.C. The nation could be the winner if he and the president decide on the latter.

Paul R. Dunn lives in Pinehurst. Contact him at paulandbj @nc.rr.com.

More like this story

JimRussell44 4 months, 3 weeks ago

Mr. Dunn wrote this article prior to the news from Tagg Romney that his dad really didn't want to be president after all. To be very honest, I considered his run for the top spot to be something akin to an item on his bucket list. In fact, I posted on this web site during the run up to the election that I thought he only wanted to be president so he could revive the $1000.00 bill and have his picture on it. Mitt should continue to do what he does best: making money by using the systems available to him and hiding the profits off shore.

bufordsplay 4 months, 3 weeks ago

Romney can put his profits anywhere he damn well pleases. They belong to him, not the government.

OldPilot 4 months, 3 weeks ago

Going to be a little more difficult now that the Cayman Islands and Switzerland have had to open up their records for certain purposes. Of course his profits belong to him. He gets to keep most of them given his effective 14% tax rate.

dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago

Mitt Romney's campaign showed him to be a man of absolutely no integrity, a man who was willing to change every position and tell any lie, even lies that were repeatedly refuted, to get elected. He doesn't serve anyone's interests but Mitt Romney's. I wouldn't trust him with the keys to my car, much less any kind of public service job.

packwilleat 4 months, 3 weeks ago

Oh, the hypocrisy from the Loyalist is thick over here.

dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago

Here's your Pee-wee, Pack:

by dustyrhoades

packwilleat 4 months, 3 weeks ago

Dusty ~ I'd sing a different tune if just one Liberal would disapprove of one thing the president has done or plans to do. The blind devotion is so bad that a Liberal won't even raise their voice over NDAA. You know I'm not a Republican. And I did raise my voice and said Mitt is a puppet to the GOP or DNC, heck it's hard to tell what side he favored.

dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago

Pack: liberals have been criticizing the moderate Barack Obama since before his first inaugural, when thy were howling OMG WE ARE BETRAYED I'LL NEVER VOTE DEMOCRAT AGAIN because Obama picked Rick Warren to deliver the invocation. Since then, liberals have blasted him over drones, Bradley Manning, caving in on the last debt ceiling deal, etc. etc.

Again, you demonstrate you don't know what the hell you're talking about. Maybe you should get your head out of your hindquarters and actually read some liberal blogs and writers before you go talking about what "liberals' do or don't do.

But since rigidly enforced ignorance appears to be your default state., I don't have much hope of that actually happening.

dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago

The blind devotion is so bad that a Liberal won't even raise their voice over NDAA.

O RLY?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/09/18/1133277/-Jailing-Journalists-Imprisoning-Protestors-NDAA-is-a-Deal-Breaker-for-Me

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Obama-s-Bush-Era-Incoheren-by-Gustav-Wynn-120910-199.html

http://www.alternet.org/story/155045/how_obama_became_a_civil_libertarian%27s_nightmare

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/18/obama-appeals-ndaa-detention-law

dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago

Rachel Maddow on NDAA:

Maddow on NDAA 1-2-12 by BIGNINO805

Start singing, Pack.

packwilleat 4 months, 3 weeks ago

Dusty ~ thanks for doing my dirty work today. You're such an easily manipulated tool. But one I can count on none the less.

dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago

Just can't admit you were wrong, can you? I thought you said you'd start singing a different tune if "just one liberal" criticized Obama. Guess you were lying about that, huh?

Here's another:

http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2012/01/03/occupy-wall-street-condemns-the-ndaa/

It's so easy to show everyone what a ridiculous fraud you are. It almost seems unfair.

pgericson 4 months, 2 weeks ago

@ Dusty... why do you bother....facts are of little interest to packwilleat....

dustyrhoades 4 months, 2 weeks ago

@pgericson: because it makes me laugh when he starts sputtering irrelevancies after I show everyone what a joke he is.

I have to admit, though, that this claim about how he's "manipulated" me is one of the all time classics. Yes, Pack, you fiend! You tricked me into showing everyone that you're completely ignorant, uninformed, and just plain wrong! How could I have fallen for that!? What will come next in your dastardly plan? Trapping me into proving that you're even more of a drooling imbecile than anyone imagined?

Yeah, you're just too tricky for me, Pack.

packwilleat 4 months, 2 weeks ago

Dusty ~ point is, you voted for O not once but twice. Regardless of how the facts lay, the fact is, no one brought up NDAA during his reelection or if they did it didn't concern anyone on the left enough to vote differently. Same as Fast & Furious or Benghazi or The National Debt or our credit rating or our falling currency. The list is endless. The left will follow this man like a pack of mouth breathing lemmings. Sorry but that makes you and the leftist nothing more than a herd of ignoramuses. You or anyone on this site has never raised any animosity to anything Obama has done or will do. I hatted Bush with a passion. But alteast I can say I'm not blinded by party favoritism. It is honestly ridiculous how devoted some people are to a party that has no concern for them or their well being. I sure there are some so delusional, that if Al Gore told them that sticking their pecker in a blender would end global warming, not only would they contemplate it, they'd try to figure out what setting would offer up the best pecker puree.

dustyrhoades 4 months, 2 weeks ago

The point is, Pack, that liberals have been bringing the NDAA up for months, along with other criticism of Obama, which you said they never do. You were wrong. You said you'd sing a different tune if one liberal criticized Obama, and I've proved that many have.

So SING, BEEYOTCH.

njc17 4 months, 2 weeks ago

Back to the Romney bashing again? Dusty,et al; let me ask you this, is it wrong to invest in start up companies? is it wrong to benefit from the success of a company you invest in?, is it wrong to restructure a company that does not make money from your investment? Is it wrong to take a losing company apart and sell off those components that drag a company into bankruptsy? Now all that being asked, Mr Romney was very successful at building as well as taking apart companies HE INVESTED in, It's his money, right? As for hiding money in off shore investments, I'll bet almost every member of congress does that too ,democrat or republican, that is business also. As for his taxes? like anybody, he PROVED!!!!!! he pays HIS FAIR share. He gives a huge amount to various charities and his Church, . What has disturbed me is his evident reluctance to really run and his lethargic campaign. That does not make me happy and has a disturbing effect on American politics. What was his real motive if he wasn't going to put his heart and soul into it? With what his son had to say, I have lost all respect for the Romney story. He was not my first or second choice, but when he was chosen he was my hope against a socialist buffoon. Now to the topic at hand, Obama will no more listen to Romney advise, that he would listen to Alan Greenspan, he has no intention to allow the business world to grow in America, no intention to allow millionaires to flourish, no intention to allow the middle class to advance. This is NOT HIS agenda.

dustyrhoades 4 months, 2 weeks ago

Lot of straw men, there, njc17. Practically a fire hazard.

dustyrhoades 4 months, 2 weeks ago

After "we're not letting fact checkers determine our campaign," after the ad claiming Chrysler was moving Ohio jobs to China (which Chrysler denied, but he kept running the ads anyway), after all the proven lies, is anyone going to truly say, explicitly, that they think Mitt Romney is an honest man? Yes or no?

packwilleat 4 months, 2 weeks ago

Dusty~ No he is not, and I never said he was honest. But than again, their ain't one in the entire lot that is. When are you going to drop your attacks on Mitt and Bush and actually see the reality of our situation? Jesus man, open your eyes.

dustyrhoades 4 months, 2 weeks ago

Dusty~ No he is not, and I never said he was honest.

So the original column is incorrect, and he should not be offered a position by Obama, right? Which was my point. Thanks for the concession. Now if you'll just admit that you were wrong about your statement that no liberals ever criticize Obama, you might look like less of a fool for now.

Jesus man, open your eyes.

by dustyrhoades

dustyrhoades 4 months, 2 weeks ago

Oh, Pack, BTW...you claim I never criticize Obama?

Intervention In Libya Is A Bad Idea

You're proven wrong again.

SING.

packwilleat 4 months, 2 weeks ago

Great Dusty. And like I said, nothing Obama has done has swayed the mind set of his devoted followers. That is how you define a lemming, right? The handful of leftist raising concern over blatant usurpations has done nothing to awaken the lemmings to the dangers of this administration.

njc17 4 months, 2 weeks ago

No Dusty, not a strawman in the bunch, I find that is the excuse used by those who have no salient response. Try again.

dustyrhoades 4 months, 2 weeks ago

sa·li·ent
/ˈsālyənt/ Adjective Most noticeable or important: "the salient points of the case". Noun A piece of land or section of fortification that juts out to form an angle. Synonyms adjective. prominent - outstanding - protruding noun. salience - projection - protrusion

Learn what words mean before you try to use them.

njc17 4 months, 2 weeks ago

try again.

njc17 4 months, 2 weeks ago

And thank you Dusty, I have used that word for years , apparently incorrectly, I stand corrected, But talk about strawman, Please Dusty stay to subject and answer points brought forward---without the blatant insults. As I remember you try some of this activity in court, and not all that satisfactory. Now my point regarding Obama availing himself to Romneys expertise, will not happen, he would not listen to any free market or open capitalist activity. Romney is the antithesis of the Obama business plan

Comments No Longer Accepted