The complaints are starting on the new Obama administration. Some are concerned that he filled his administration with former Clinton hands, reflecting the old school (if more competent), not the change we need.

“What worries me is there is not one person in the senior group who is the outsider to this club,” cautioned Robert Kuttner of the American Prospect. “Where is the diversity of opinion in this economic team?”

David Sirota of our own Campaign for America’s Future observes that some terrific progressives have been appointed to high-level positions in the Administration, but they are political jobs, not substantive ones. They are “positions that are focused on selling policy, whatever that policy may be. “ In contrast, the “policy advisers who actually craft policy are almost all right-of-center, Establishment choices.”

Discontent is coming from the other direction as well, as Democrats increase estimates of the cost to revive the economy. During the campaign Obama pledged roughly $150 billion in spending over 10 years to create new jobs for clean energy and rebuilding schools. Now Congressional Democrats are estimating immediate expenditures in the $700 billion range. The GOP has created a spendometer to track the continuing increases.

Obama himself dodges questions about cost. “It is going to be of a size and scope that is necessary to get this economy back on track,” he said in his November 24 press conference. “I don’t want to get into numbers right now.”

The question for progressives is whether to demand the details or question his choices.

Both seem premature. Political change happens with a compass, not a roadmap. Obama has clearly indicated which way he wants to lead: in the direction of clean energy, massive public investments, an exit from Iraq and “affordable, accessible health care for all Americans.” These are important and fundamentally progressive goals.

Digby sees a positive side to the appointments to political — if not substantive — positions. Simply using progressive language drives our country in a positive direction.

Let’s hope that those old Clinton hands will have the skills and experience to navigate the changing terrain. Obama’s job is to set a direction. Our job is to push him forwards and keep him on course.

Today’s unemployment data contain gloomy news. Gloomy, but expected. The interpretation of the data is even worse.

First, the data. Unemployment rose to 10.2 percent last month, breaking the double digit barrier. Most people expected it to happen, though the job loss (190,000) was a bit worse than most economic forecasts (175,000). We can maybe be happy that the October job loss wasn’t as high as September (263,000), but this modest deceleration doesn’t mean much to the 15.7 million people without work, the 9.3 million people working part-time but looking for full-time, or the 3.2 million people who are discouraged or marginally attached to the work force and barely even looking anymore. Nearly 20 percent of the workforce isn’t where it wants to be.

In other words, it’s bad. You don’t need me or the Bureau of Labor Statistics to tell you that.

The interesting part is where it’s bad and what to do about it.

The biggest job losses in October were in construction (62,000) and manufacturing (61,000). In the last year, these sectors have lost over 2.5 million jobs between them. Job losses in these sectors hurt worse than most other sectors. Manufacturing jobs have a bigger economic “multiplier” than other sectors, creating more jobs and more economic activity around them. Manufacturing creates jobs “downstream,” as production workers buy sandwiches from restaurants; and “upstream,” as steelworkers and coal miners work to provide raw material. The benefits of construction obviously count for more and last longer than just the construction itself. Anybody who doesn’t live in a cave knows that.

But manufacturing and construction are losing more jobs than any other sector. Health care and temporary jobs are the only positive — if we can cheer sickness or a temp job.

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

This isn’t just a temporary blip. Construction is sinking from the burst of the housing bubble and general economic doldrums. Manufacturing is suffering from long term structural declines and a trade policy that favors imports over domestic production.

The solution leaps out from the data. These two sectors respond most clearly to public sector investment. During this downturn, we can build roads, rail lines and bridges. During this downturn, we can fix school roofs and turn temporary trailers for overcrowded schools into permanent classrooms for eager students. During this downturn, we can build the windmills and install the solar cells to move us towards energy independence. During this downturn we can rebuild a productive economy for the future.

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Maybe a quarter of the 800 billion stimulus package pushed in this direction. We need more. First, we need more stimulus. Good old-fashioned Keynesian stimulus during the downturn. Put people to work laying those rail lines and fixing those school roofs.

Second, we need to make sure the money stays in our own economy. We can’t ask American taxpayers to foot the bill or expect American workers to cheer when the windmills of the new energy economy are imported from Spain. It’s no gift to our economy to fix the water main with pipes imported from China that were dumped in US markets at below market costs, driving our own domestic pipe industry out of business. We can do better. We need to do better.

I’ll close with the thing we don’t need, the interpretation I warned against in the beginning. The Associated Press story about today’s unemployment data put it this way: “A robust economic recovery won’t be sustainable if consumers don’t pick up their spending.”

Wrong wrong wrong. The debt-driven consumption economy was the problem. The solution is not for consumers without jobs to start spending again. The solution is to rebuild our economy. From the ground up. The old fashioned way.

Obama has introduced his budget, and people are hyperventilating about the deficit. Piling “debt on the backs of our kids and our grandkids,” declares House minority leader John Boehner (R-Ohio). “Bloated,” exclaims Democrat Evan Bayh of Nebraska.

With all the hyperventilating, we are forgetting what’s most important. Deficits aren’t necessarily bad. Sometimes deficits can be good.

• Credit card debt for a plasma TV? Bad.
• Low interest loans for a college diploma? Good.

• Buying a second car you don’t need? Bad.
• Borrowing for a house when the kids are born? Good.

Deficits have taken almost mythical hold of our imagination. The word “deficit” has become a stand-in for words like waste and irresponsibility – so running a deficit is nearly synonymous with irresponsibility. But deficits are not necessarily irresponsible. Economists consider deficits simply one economic variable to be taken into consideration among many others.

• Every successful business starts with a loan. Entrepreneurs earn their ulcers looking at their loan schedules, not expecting a profit until the third year. But still they borrow. It’s necessary to succeed.

The Obama budget shows deficits in the trillions. Maybe that’s okay. The US had a budget deficit for most of our stunning boom after World War II.

Our deficit might appear less frightening if we think not in terms of dollars, but as percent of GDP . The U.S. is a gigantic economy, so national numbers become frighteningly large.

Our deficit this year is $1.7 trillion. That’s big. But our economy is $14.2 trillion. That’s even bigger. Put them together and our deficit is 12% of our GDP . It is high, but not extraordinary by historical or international standards. It is like a person who earns $30,000 with a $3,500 deficit at the end of the year. It’s a lot. But it can be managed. Indeed, if the deficit bought some education or a new set of tools, it might not be irresponsible at all; it might even be worth it.

Source: OMB history, 1930-2008; CBO projections, 2008-10

Even if we look at the accumulated debt, not the annual deficit, the U.S. level of debt is lower than most advanced industrial countries’ – and during the current crisis, many other countries are, like the U.S., deliberately raising their deficits. In 2008, France’s public debt was 64 percent of its GDP ; Germany’s was 63 percent. Japan sets the scale at 170 percent.

Source: CIA

Obama seems to understand this. He’s at his best when he talks about cutting waste, but “what we will not cut are investments that will lead to real growth and prosperity over the long term.” Energy, health care and education are usually at the top of the list.

He’s at his worst when he promises to cut the budget deficit in half by the end of his first term. First, it creates an impossible expectation. Second, it accepts deficit reduction as more fundamental than it needs to be.

The conclusion: Don’t panic. Our deficit is high and it deserves attention. But at this time of crisis, deficit spending to make sensible investments and put people to work is both necessary and affordable. It can turn our troubles around, and build the resources that we need for the future – clean energy, an educated workforce and a 21st century infrastructure. Build, and build big.

Two things happened yesterday. First, I published this major post about the role prisons play in the U.S. economy. Later yesterday evening, the Bureau of Justice Statistics released new data about people in prison. Any surprise? The number continued to rise.

Yes, crime continues to decline; and yes, “soft on crime” was absent from this year’s election debate. But still the U.S. locks up more and more people.

We have 2.3 million people behind bars. 1 out of every 100 adults overall. 1 out of 9 black man in his twenties. Our rates of incarceration are seven times historical and international norms, and we spend about $200 billion every year on the crime control industry. But still we build.

Part of the problem (and the solution) is in criminal justice policy – sentencing and parole practice, in particular. We can and should find smart, cost-effective ways to keep people safe. But part of the problem is also in economic policy. Not just the recession, which will probably push crime up soon enough, but in the role that prisons play in rural economies.

Rural America has been struggling for years. Prisons are often offered as a quick fix. Instant jobs with government benefits.

No, they don’t work well for economic development in the long run. And yes, many of the best jobs go to people from out of town. But it isn’t presented that way by rural politicians looking for rural votes from people who are genuinely looking for work.

That’s why I proposed a grant program by the federal government to help states cover transitional costs to move from prison economies to more productive purposes. It would help the rural economies, where people would rather find work without razor wire fencing, and it could free states to redirect their own resources out of prisons and into other state uses – from schools to roads to hospitals.

It’s just one thing. But it’s not only the change we need. It’s something that needs to change.

China has opened a new subway system every y

Previous posts and our report have discussed how America is falling apart. Collapsing bridges, high unemployment, and so forth. In this post I discuss how we are falling behind.

China recently announced an economic stimulus package worth $586 billion, roughly 7% of its gross domestic product and the largest in its history. The Washington Post describes the plan as response to “increasing social unrest due to factory closings and rising unemployment.”

The plan is being compared to the New Deal. It will “ease credit restrictions, expand social welfare services and launch an infrastructure spending program that would include the construction of new railways, roads and airports.”

This is on top of China’s already aggressive plans to expand high-speed and freight rail nationwide. China has opened at least one new subway system every year for the past six years.

Meanwhile Europe announced a stimulus plan worth $256 billion, or 1.5% of the European Union’s gross domestic product. Every member state will define its own part, but they are generally heavy on public works.

“The goal of the fund is to mobilize workers, jobs and resources,” said Spain’s Prime Minister, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero. The lion’s share of Spain’s $14 billion plan is for new construction and upgrades of existing public buildings, infrastructure, parks, schools and sports facilities

Denmark is ahead with an economy built around “flexicurity,” a generous system of carefully monitored unemployment benefits and training for displaced workers, designed to smooth transitions caused by international trade. The system costs fully 5% of Danish GDP , but former Prime Minister of Denmark, Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, thinks it’s worth it. “Active labour market policies help the unemployed to find work and increase their skills through training in periods between jobs. The idea is to make the journey from the old job to the new job as short, as easy and as productive as possible.”

With new leadership, the U.S. might well snap out of its doldrums. Our leaders no longer think the economy is fundamentally sound, nor do free market ideologues reject government intervention out of hand. The recovery packages are still under construction. But we are closing in on the change we need.

Everybody is saying the same thing. Stimulus plans don’t mean tax rebates worth a few tanks of gas and a restaurant dinner. Stimulus plans means new roads and bridges, aid to states so they won’t lay off nurses and teaching assistants, and a down payment on a new energy economy with windmills and commuter rail.

Most importantly, people have turned the corner on money. Stimulus will take real money, measured in hundreds of billions of dollars and percents of GDP . Low estimates put the investment at $300 billion. High ones reach $700 billion. Paul Krugman, with his hot new Nobel prize in economics, recommends “figure out how much help [you] think the economy needs, then add 50 percent.”

The former but not future Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers has changed his tune. No longer should stimulus be “targeted, timely and temporary.” Now it should be “speedy, substantial and sustained.” If he changes the first S to “strategic,” he’ll sound just like the Campaign for America’s Future. “Strategic” points towards energy and education, investments that pay back over time.

Increasingly, even the deficit hawks recognize that this is not the time to worry about deficits. This is the time for action. To paraphrase FDR, when the house is burning, you don’t fret about the cost of the hose.

Over the weekend, president-elect Barack Obama started to define what the New York Times labeled a Vast Economic Stimulus Plan.

“We’ll be working out the details in the weeks ahead, but it will be a two-year, nationwide effort to jumpstart job creation in America and lay the foundation for a strong and growing economy. We’ll put people back to work rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges, modernizing schools that are failing our children, and building wind farms and solar panels, fuel-efficient cars and the alternative energy technologies that can free us from our dependence on foreign oil and keep our economy competitive in the years ahead.”

He is exactly right, and he’s been saying this since the campaign.

In June he told the U.S. conference of Mayors:

“Now is not the time for small plans. Now is the time for bold action to rebuild and renew America. We’ve done this before. Two hundred years ago, in 1808, Thomas Jefferson oversaw an infrastructure plan that envisioned the Homestead Act, the transcontinental railroads, and the Erie Canal. One hundred years later, in 1908, Teddy Roosevelt called together leaders from business and government to develop a plan for a 20th century infrastructure. Today, in 2008, it falls on us to take up this call again – to re-imagine America’s landscape and remake America’s future. That is the cause of this campaign, and that will be the cause of my presidency.”

Back then he was estimating expenditures in the $150 billion range – and nowadays that’s rounding error. But back then the Dow was at 12,000 and 1.5 million more people had jobs. It’s nice to see him up the ante.

The American people are behind this too. A June survey by Hart Research showed a country that wants more than quick stimulus. Nearly two-thirds (63 percent) of voters think the economy is facing “long-term, structural economic problems.” Only one-third (30 percent) say it is a “short-term economic downturn.”

Investing in physical infrastructure is among the most popular of long-term solutions. A June survey by Rockefeller Foundation found 82 percent support for “increasing government spending on things like public-works projects to help create jobs.” Reconstruction will take time and exceed the limits of a single budget cycle – but for long term solutions to long term problems, you don’t “pay as you go.” You invest over time.

We discussed all of this last week at our conference on Real Investment in America. I wrote all about it in our snazzy new report, The Investment Deficit.

Build, baby, build. The consensus is emerging.

Within hours of Barack Obama’s election, naysayers chastened caution. Don’t go too far, they inveighed. Build trust slowly with restrained, moderate, and gradual actions, they admonished.

In other words: Start with piddling plans.

Basically, they want to abort hope — kill it before it has a chance.

That is all wrong after an election in which it’s believed that a higher percentage of Americans voted than at any time in the past 40 years; a win that brought tears to the eyes of even hardened reporters; a result that drew joyful citizens into streets across the country to celebrate, a balloting that swept even larger majorities of Democrats into the U.S. House and Senate.

This moment during which the nation is suffering great economic peril pleads for political valor. This moment screams for boldness.

Troubled times demand greatness. Franklin D. Roosevelt knew that. He’s the reason U.S. presidents are judged by the sum of their accomplishments in their first 100 days in office.

When FDR was inaugurated in 1933, the country was in the midst of the Great Depression. He didn’t waste time tinkering. After 100 days, he’d given the country the Emergency Banking Act, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Civilian Conservation Corps, the Federal Emergency Relief Act and the Tennessee Valley Authority.

Obama may not inherit a Great Depression, but he’ll take the oath during an intense recession. Look at the news that arrived the same week as his election: Unemployment rose to 6.5 percent after 10 straight months of jobs losses totaling more than 1.2 million; the stock market dropped 1,000 points in 48 hours after the worst October showing in two decades; auto makers traveled to Capitol Hill begging like hobos for handouts to stave off bankruptcy; two dozen major retailers revealed sales declines, most double digit; and The New York Times reported hospitals are strained as they register fewer paying patients and increased charity cases.

These problems won’t be solved with timidity. In his first press conference after the election, Obama said resolving the economic crisis is his top priority. He said, in fact, “I will confront the economic crisis head on.” No weak-heartedness suggested there.

He said a new president can restore confidence and advance an agenda for the middle class. That is exactly what FDR did with the combination of legislation and fireside chats.

During this brief press conference, Obama got it right, emphasizing aid to the middle class. He said it is essential to pass a rescue plan that would create jobs and extend unemployment benefits. He wants aid to state and local governments so they don’t increase taxes or furlough workers.

The federal government should help both small businesses and the huge auto industry, which provides jobs directly and indirectly through its suppliers.

The $700 billion bailout must be reviewed, he said, to ensure that it is stabilizing markets, that it’s not unduly rewarding the Wall Street risk-takers who caused the crisis, and that it’s helping families avoid foreclosure.
In addition, he said it’s essential to implement policies to grow the middle class such as investing in clean energy technology, resolving the nation’s health insurance dilemma, and providing tax relief for working families.
These are the correct priorities. And his plans are audacious. Which means he needs our help.

He called for bipartisan cooperation in accomplishing these goals. But he’ll need more than that. He will need the kind of support he got in those weeks just before Election Day.

All of those who voted for him, all of those who want to keep hope alive, and all of those who want real change must demand both houses of Congress and both political parties work with Obama to accomplish it. Those who believe in real change must make it clear that they won’t stand by and allow courageous action to be reduced to faint-hearted baby steps.

On election night, Obama told the crowd in Chicago that the victory was theirs: “I know you didn’t do this just to win an election and I know you didn’t do it for me.”

Then he warned of what is ahead:

“You did it because you understand the enormity of the task that lies ahead. For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime–two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century.”

With more than 10,000 volunteers across the country, the United Steelworkers campaigned hard to help get Obama on that Chicago stage to make that speech. We will back him as he works to fulfill his promises of what is a New Deal for the new century. And we urge every American who wants real change to join us to ensure his success, the nation’s success.

Almost overlooked in this morning’s extraordinary headlines about government intervention to protect the nation’s financial system from collapse was the failure of the House of Representatives on Thursday to act on a $50 billion stimulus package for the rest of us.

The legislation would have included $20 billion or so for infrastructure projects, plus additional funding for the food stamp program, the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program and state Medicaid subsidies.

This stimulus effort was resisted by the White House and by congressional conservatives, one of whom—House Minority Whip Roy Blunt, R‑Mo.—groused that “bailing out the states on their Medicaid problems or providing $25 billion worth of infrastructure spending are not stimulative and everyone knows that.”

“Everyone knows that?” No. What “everyone knows” is that when ordinary people have good jobs—whether they are created by private investment or public investment—they are able to buy the houses, cars and other goods and services that help keep the economy afloat. In particular, a program of spending public dollars on a range of job-producing activities—from fixing roads and bridges to “greening” our public buildings with renewable energy and conservation—would go a long way toward stabilizing the faltering middle class of this country. What “everyone knows,” or ought to realize, is that doing nothing to interrupt the falling dominoes of spending cutbacks at the federal, state and local levels is a recipe for continued economic erosion.

President Bush today addressed the nation and called for bipartisan support for a bailout plan for Wall Street. But there was nothing in his speech that answered the question that is probably on the minds of millions of Americans who are struggling on Main Street: “Where’s our bailout?”

Even as Sen. John McCain has been forced to backtrack on his repeated assertions that the economy’s “fundamentals” are strong, conservatives still seem determined to stand back, arms folded, as the fortunes of working-class families continues to erode.

The misery index, which we’re resurrecting to bring home the extent to which ordinary people are struggling in today’s economy, has risen. Wednesday, the Labor Department reported a new inflation rate of 5.4 percent for the 12 months ending in August. The unemployment rate for August was 6.1 percent. So the misery index (unemployment plus inflation) is now 11.5 percent—worse than any month since June 1991, more than 17 years ago.

Behind our ad in The New York Times this week on “the dream gone bad” is a fact sheet that spells out the financial pain since 2000: the decline in inflation-adjusted median household income, the increase in the poverty rate, the lost jobs, the growing wealth gap between average workers and CEOs.

This is an even more serious issue in the African-American community, as outlined in a report released Thursday by the Economic Policy Institute. The report, “Reversal of Fortune,” concludes that while African Americans as a whole experienced “increasing employment, higher wages and a historic drop in the poverty rate” in the 1990s, since 2000 “wage growth for the median black worker has stagnated, incomes and employment have declined and poverty has increased.”

The economic gap between African Americans and the rest of the nation is widening again after showing signs of narrowing in the 1990s. Yet, a serious discussion about closing this gap appears to be off the table, as Bennett College President and economist Julianne Malveaux points out in this interview. In the 1970s, targeted efforts such as the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act were designed to help provide job opportunities that were not being provided by the private sector. Conservatives, hell-bent to implement their trickle-down strategy of tax cuts for the rich—with no strategy for making sure that anything would actually trickle down to communities where joblessness was rampant—used examples of corruption and mismanagement as an excuse to kill the program.

Today, the conservative argument about the economic gap between whites and blacks in America is more or less reduced to “blacks need more education.” African American students suffer disproportionately from poor schools. But the EPI study shows that when the economy as a whole works for working people, the African-American community is poised to benefit as well.

The debate we need on the economy, not just for the African-American community but for everyone, has to span these issues: investing in our communities so that all of our communities are equipped to prosper, empowering our workers so that they are able to secure good wages and benefits and are not forced into a race to the bottom, and making full employment the central objective of government economic policy.

We, the working people of this country—black, white, yellow and brown—are also too big to fail. We need to see the recovery plan for us.

Last year on August 1, the I-35W bridge in Minneapolis collapsed during rush hour. Thirteen people died and more than 100 were wounded. A school bus carrying 52 children teetered on the brink but did not fall.

This bridge is not alone. Our nation’s infrastructure is deteriorating, dying of old age and neglect.

Bridges and roads. The U.S. Department of Transportation reports that nearly 25 percent of bridges in the U.S.—over 152,000 bridges—are “structurally deficient or functionally obsolete.” Heavier vehicles, like school buses and delivery trucks, are forced to take lengthy detours for safer bridges. Nearly one in four miles of urban interstate is in “poor” or “mediocre” condition.

Levees and waterways. Earlier this year, thousands of homes and millions of acres of crops were destroyed after heavy rains overwhelmed obsolete levees along the Mississippi River. In 2007, the American Society of Civil Engineers found more than 150 levees to be at high risk of failing due to poor maintenance. Over a quarter of the dams overseen by the Corps of Engineers have exceeded the lifespan for which they were designed and need major repairs to ensure their safety.

Water and steam. A steam pipe explosion in Manhattan last year launched a tow truck 12 feet in the air, killing one person and injuring dozens more. The blast opened a 40-foot-diameter crater and spread toxic asbestos, closing off 40 square blocks for five days. Almost every state—from California, Hawaii, and New York to Alaska and North Carolina—has reported record breakdowns in water infrastructure. In the words of one expert, “an epidemic of breaking pipes is causing unprecedented havoc.”

These are just illustrations of the deadly danger of letting our infrastructure go unmaintained. America’s electric power grid, dams, water treatment plants, airports, and railways are all in dire need of repairs and improvements.

The solution is obvious. Repair and rebuild. Rebuilding our infrastructure provides jobs—good jobs that can never be outsourced—and an economic shot in the arm that we desperately need. The U.S. Department of Transportation estimates that every $1 billion in federal highway investment creates 47,500 new jobs and generates more than $2 billion in economic activity.

The “greatest generation” built the Interstate Highway System and laid the groundwork for decades of economic expansion. Now it’s our turn to rebuild the highways and add high-speed rail to boot. We’ll be faster, safer and more efficient. Yes, it will cost money, and yes, we’re running deficits. But this is no time to run scared. These are long-term investments and they will pay off over time.

Don’t fall for the “pay as you go” trap or fear the “tax and spend” label. Real people are smarter than that. A new poll by Time Magazine and the Rockefeller Foundation finds 83 percent of the public supports “increasing government spending on things like public works projects to help create jobs.” Support is at 83 percent among the baby-boom generation who built the interstates, and a surprising 90 percent among the young generation Y who are watching them fall apart.

Let’s invest now to turn the economy around.