ON DEADLINE: Obama can't wait to start on economy

There's only one president at a time, as Barack Obama has said repeatedly since he was elected to be the next one. But there's also no time to waste as the nation faces the worst economic turmoil in 75 years.

That creates both a haven and a platform for the president-elect. Because he is not yet in charge, he can propose economic plans while leaving the details for later. And because he will take command in less than two months, he can exert leadership now to ease uncertainties that can worsen the situation in financial markets.

Obama balanced the two roles as he announced his new Cabinet and White House economic team Monday, the earliest an incoming president ever has done so.

Contrast that with the last presidential transition in such dire economic times. Franklin D. Roosevelt did not nominate his secretary of the treasury until Feb. 21, 1933. He took office on March 4, at the last inauguration before the date was changed to the current Jan. 20.

The four-month gap between election and inauguration was a time of uncertainty and bitterness, with Roosevelt unwilling to cooperate, let alone collaborate, with the defeated Herbert Hoover because he wanted no taint of shared blame for the Depression.

In this transition, President George W. Bush said from the start that he would cooperate fully with the Democratic successor he opposed. And Obama promised Monday that he will "honor the commitments made by the current administration" to deal with the economic and market crises.

Bush's cooperation probably would not extend to the costly legislation Obama wants passed to create jobs and stimulate the economy. Obama gave no cost estimate, saying he'd be working all that out with his new economic team. There is speculation that the price could run to $500 billion, perhaps more.

When he does deliver the details, they surely will include steps Bush would have opposed and perhaps vetoed. But the new president wants the legislation enacted in the new, more Democratic Congress, which convenes Jan. 6, and ready for his signature after he is inaugurated two weeks later.

Again, that is in striking contrast to the Depression transition, when a Congress with narrow Democratic majorities was in session for three months but did almost nothing. That was fine with Roosevelt, who held his New Deal cards closely until he took office.

Hoover tried to get Roosevelt to join him in statements and action on the collapsing economy, but FDR stayed out of it.

Before his election, Obama supported the administration's $700 billion financial markets bailout plan. While some Democrats have complained at changes in the way the Treasury is using the money, Obama has not. When Bush called a mid-November economic summit conference of the world's 20 leading industrial nations, Obama stayed away from what would have been an awkward situation for a president-elect. The foreign leaders are more interested in his plans than in the ideas of the lame-duck president. The conference produced words but no action, except an agreement to convene again in the spring.

Obama's action was no snub. He sent two top advisers to represent him as observers at the conference. They said they would take no formal role because - that phrase again - there is only one president at a time.

As Jonathan Alter wrote in his FDR history, "The Defining Moment," Roosevelt wanted to make sure that people remembered it as a Republican Depression. "If this meant sitting by idly while the economy sunk lower, FDR could live with that," Alter wrote.

Obama is anything but idle. It isn't easy to be an activist as president-elect, but he's trying. And without illusions. "The economy is likely to get worse before it gets better," he said.

He's acting with a pragmatic political approach that irks his more liberal supporters. They aren't happy with his choice of Washington veterans for the Cabinet and his White House team, although the lesson of prior Democratic administrations has been that to rely largely on newcomers is to court failure. Nor will liberals like his hedging on his campaign promise to raise taxes on incomes of more than $250,000 a year.

Obama said he would undo Bush's tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans, but he may not tackle that now. The Bush tax cuts expire at the beginning of 2011, and the new president might let them stand until then. The upper-bracket increase was supposed to offset some of the cost of the middle-income tax breaks he still plans. But economists frown on any tax increase, even on the wealthy, with the economic slumping.

Besides, while congressional Republicans lost strength in the elections, Obama still has to deal with them. The Democrats can deliver in the House, but they may need Republican help, or at least acquiescence, to get the Obama program through the Senate. They will have at least 58 seats - two Senate contests have yet to be settled. A 41-vote minority can block action in the Senate, and a bill including any tax increase would draw stiff Republican opposition.

At a minimum, that would slow a process Obama says cannot wait.

---

EDITOR'S NOTE - Walter R. Mears has reported on politics and government for The Associated Press for more than 45 years. He is retired and lives in Chapel Hill, N.C.