Author Topic: Obama's OMB Pick Oversaw Citi Unit That Shorted Housing Market - (UPDATED)  (Read 1181 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Jack Lew: Obama's OMB Pick Oversaw Citigroup Unit That Shorted Housing Market
www.huffingtonpost.com
First Posted: 07-14-10 10:55 AM   |   Updated: 07-14-10 11:22 AM



________________________ ________________________ _______________


President Barack Obama's choice to lead the White House budget office oversaw a Citigroup unit that profited off the housing collapse and financial crisis by investing in a hedge fund king who correctly predicted the eventual subprime meltdown and now finds himself involved in the center of the U.S. government's fraud case against Goldman Sachs.

Jacob Lew, named Tuesday as Obama's nominee to lead the Office of Management and Budget to replace departing OMB chief Peter Orszag, served as chief operating officer of Citigroup Alternative Investments in 2008. He has served as a top aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton since the administration came into office.

Though Lew is a longtime public servant who's spent nearly 30 years in various positions throughout government, it is his few years at Citi -- in particular the one year he spent at its then-$54 billion proprietary trading, hedge fund and private equity unit -- that's likely to raise the most eyebrows in the coming weeks as Lew faces a Senate confirmation hearing.

Especially his unit's investments in a hedge fund that bet on the housing market to collapse -- a reality suffered by millions of American homeowners.

At the time, Citi's Alternative Investments unit was a $54.3 billion behemoth that participated in the kinds of activities that would be largely limited under the coming financial reform bill. The bill, which is expected to pass the Senate as soon as this week, contains the "Volcker Rules," named after their champion, former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, which limits the amount of money banks can invest in hedge funds, private equity funds, and use to either invest or speculate in the financial markets. About 20 percent of the unit's available funds, or $11 billion, came from Citi itself (rather than clients), according to the bank's April 18, 2008, presentation to investors.

One part of the entity invested in hedge funds. Multi-Adviser Hedge Fund Portfolios LLC was a unit of Alternative Investments' Hedge Fund Management Group, the 36th-largest such "fund of hedge funds" in the world when Lew came aboard, according to a ranking by Alpha magazine, a publication that covers the hedge fund industry.

That Multi-Adviser fund in particular had $407 million by the end of 2007, a week before Lew was named as Alternative Investments' chief operating officer, according to SEC filings. At that time, it had $18 million invested in Paulson Advantage Plus LP, worth $26.4 million, comprising about 6.5 percent of the Multi-Adviser fund's total capital.

The Paulson fund was run by hedge fund king John Paulson, the man who made billions off the deterioration of the housing industry by making bearish bets on securities tied to home mortgages -- particularly subprime home mortgages.

One of those bets involved Goldman Sachs, Wall Street's most profitable firm and the target of multiple investigations and lawsuits stemming from its bets on the housing market and actions during the height of the financial crisis.

On April 16, the SEC charged Goldman and one of its employees for defrauding investors by creating and selling exotic securities tied to subprime home mortgages in 2007 without disclosing that they were handpicked by a hedge fund that was betting on them to fail.

That hedge fund was run by John Paulson. He has not been charged with any wrongdoing, nor is he likely to be.

During Lew's tenure atop Citi's Alternative Investments group, the Multi-Adviser fund significantly increased its investment in Paulson's fund, more than doubling Citi's investment to $41.5 million by March 2008. On paper the firm's investment was worth $55.2 million, accounting for 9.7 percent of the fund's total assets to rank as its second-biggest investment, SEC filings show.

The next quarter, the value of the investment jumped to $60.3 million, making it the biggest part of the Multi-Adviser fund.

By the end of September, the Citi fund, realizing some of its profits, took money out of Paulson's hedge fund. It's investment was down to $31.5 million, a $10 million decrease from June, but it was still worth $57.3 million, a mere $3 million less than June's appraisal, according to filings with the SEC.

By December 31, the value of Citi's investment jumped to $57.3 million, reflecting the declining fortunes of homeowners and other investors, and the economy at large. It now comprised 10 percent of the Multi-Adviser fund, making it the fund's biggest holding.

The Citi fund redeemed $13 million of its stake in Paulson's hedge fund by March 2009, bringing its investment down to $18.5 million -- roughly the same amount it was before Lew became Alternative Investments' COO. But that stake -- worth $26 million at the end of 2007 -- was now worth more than $50 million, SEC filings show.

Paulson's fund, Advantage Plus LP, went up 37.8 percent in 2008, according to Paulson's year-end letter to shareholders.

The Advantage Plus fund made its money thanks to bearish bets on financial institutions.

"[E]ight out of the top 10 banks on our list either failed, were recapitalized by the government, or were sold off to other banks as part of government-backed transactions," the hedge fund wrote to investors in its year-end letter.

Investors who bet on declines perform a productive role in financial markets. Such investments send signals to the markets that certain securities or valuations of certain companies or asset classes may be overvalued, perhaps tempering what may be too much enthusiasm that prices will continue to rise.

But in an age in which the housing collapse led to a financial upheaval that cost 8 million American jobs and plunged the nation into its deepest recession since the Great Depression, bets that profited off the collapse may not be perceived in the best light.

In Florida, Democratic Congressman and Senate hopeful Kendrick Meek is hammering his Democratic opponent, billionaire Jeff Greene, for his investments in securities tied to subprime mortgages, accusing him of profiting "off the backs of Floridians" who defaulted on their home mortgage loans. Greene reportedly doubled his net worth by betting against homeowners.

Citi paid Lew $1.1 million for his year at Alternative Investments, according to an ethics disclosure report filed in January 2009. He was also eligible for an undisclosed bonus. Lew did not immediately return a call for comment.

His unit, though, lost as much as billions of dollars in 2008 as its bets turned sour. In the first quarter of 2008 alone the unit lost $509 million; the company stopped publicly disclosing the unit's individual numbers soon thereafter, but the part of the company that absorbed Alternative Investments lost $20.1 billion in 2008, according to the bank's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Citigroup, the nation's third-largest bank, received $45 billion in TARP bailout funds that year. The firm also has issued $64.6 billion in taxpayer-backed debt through a crisis-era Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation program, according to its latest quarterly filing with the SEC. And it stands to gain a few billion dollars more by modifying home mortgages under the administration's foreclosure-prevention plan, Treasury Department figures show.

Lew's role at the fund is raising some eyebrows among good government groups.

"That sounds pretty nasty, doesn't it?" said Gary Bass, executive director of OMB Watch, a group that monitors the budget office. "Any activity and any player that contributed to the economic calamity needs to be looked at.

"We already got enough players in this administration that certainly were key players in the economic malaise that we currently have," Bass continued. "Why shouldn't we have another one?" he said with a slight chuckle.

But Bass added that he thought Lew was an otherwise excellent choice for the position, noting that as budget director Lew has a proven track record (he held the position during part of the Clinton administration).

During a January confirmation hearing before a Senate panel for his State Department post, Lew told senators that the investments his unit engaged in "ranged from private equity investments to real estate investments and various forms of fixed-income investments."

In December 2007, Citigroup Alternative Investments ended up supporting some of the bank's off-balance-sheet vehicles that tanked that year along with the subprime mortgage market. Known as structured investment vehicles, Citigroup effectively brought the SIVs onto its balance sheet by backing them up, leading to tens of billions in losses.

While putting him atop Treasury may have been a risky move considering his background, Bass said OMB would be a good fit -- particularly if he calls for more stimulus spending to combat the softening economy as opposed to insisting on deficit reduction.

Bass added that, given Lew's position overseeing a unit that invested in hedge funds, he'd like to know whether Lew believes that hedge fund managers should be taxed like other workers, as opposed to the relatively paltry share of income they give to Uncle Sam thanks to rules governing taxable income earned by private-equity and venture-capital firms, and hedge funds. Their compensation, part of which is earned on "carried interest," isn't taxed like regular wages because of their role in creating new investments.

The White House did not return a phone call and an e-mail seeking comment.

However, during his regular briefing with White House reporters on Tuesday, Obama's chief spokesman, Robert Gibbs, was questioned about Lew's tenure at Citigroup. Gibbs dismissed the queries, according to a transcript.

"Obviously, Jack has been through a vetting process before," Gibbs told a reporter who had asked whether Obama ever questioned Lew about his work at Citigroup. Gibbs eventually said he didn't know.

Asked if Lew's time at Citigroup was "relevant" and whether it would be "relevant" during his next confirmation hearing, Gibbs said that "those questions have been dealt with."

During that January 2009 confirmation hearing, Senator Johnny Isakson, a Georgia Republican, asked Lew if it was correct that he was COO of Citi's Alternative Investments unit (it was); what kind of investments the unit engaged in ("they ranged from private equity investments to real estate investments and various forms of fixed-income investments"); and whether those investments involved "much of international security trading" ("Lew said "not directly" and those that had an international focus "were really managed offshore"), according to a transcript.

There were no other questions about Lew's time at Citigroup.

*************************
Shahien Nasiripour is the business reporter for the Huffington Post. You can send him an e-mail; bookmark his page; subscribe to his RSS feed; follow him on Twitter; friend him on Facebook; become a fan; and/or get e-mail alerts when he reports the latest news.


________________________ ________________________ ________________

IS THERE ANY DOUBT LEFT FOR YOU OBAMA SUPPORTERS WTF IS GOING ON HERE?  

SUCKERS.  

kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
So you're saying Lew knew of Goldman Sachs plot to get investors to put money into a failing stock so they could profit?  If so why hasn't he been charged?

It seems to me he made a solid FINANCIAL decision by investing in a fund that gained rapidly during the housing crash.  I read no where that says he fooled or duped anyone into anything.  It sounds to me like he made a solid bet on a fund and made money for citibank off of it.  If Goldman Sachs were less than ethical i don't see how he's at fault as well, unless like i say, you're alleging he was in on it in which case i would ask for proof.
Abandon every hope...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
So you're saying Lew knew of Goldman Sachs plot to get investors to put money into a failing stock so they could profit?  If so why hasn't he been charged?

It seems to me he made a solid FINANCIAL decision by investing in a fund that gained rapidly during the housing crash.  I read no where that says he fooled or duped anyone into anything.  It sounds to me like he made a solid bet on a fund and made money for citibank off of it.  If Goldman Sachs were less than ethical i don't see how he's at fault as well, unless like i say, you're alleging he was in on it in which case i would ask for proof.

I guess you missed this part KC? ? ? ? ?  ?

How the hell can you support this?  Seriously, there is something mentally wrong with you obama supporters. 
________________________ ________________________ ____________________


His unit, though, lost as much as billions of dollars in 2008 as its bets turned sour. In the first quarter of 2008 alone the unit lost $509 million; the company stopped publicly disclosing the unit's individual numbers soon thereafter, but the part of the company that absorbed Alternative Investments lost $20.1 billion in 2008, according to the bank's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
Okay so he stayed on the gravy train too long.  Many a smart adviser did.  I wouldn't assume he is now unable to do his current job.  Considering his history and credentials i would say he is like the thousands of other advisers who lost money, he stayed too long on a good thing and paid for it. 

What is the point you are trying to make?  That because he oversaw a rapid rise then loss during a time of economic uncertainty, that he is now unqualified?  I think you would find many a smart man 'unqualified' if you used that as your litmus test.
Abandon every hope...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Okay so he stayed on the gravy train too long.  Many a smart adviser did.  I wouldn't assume he is now unable to do his current job.  Considering his history and credentials i would say he is like the thousands of other advisers who lost money, he stayed too long on a good thing and paid for it. 

What is the point you are trying to make?  That because he oversaw a rapid rise then loss during a time of economic uncertainty, that he is now unqualified?  I think you would find many a smart man 'unqualified' if you used that as your litmus test.

KC - please tell me how this guy is any different than the guy who obama said should not go blow the college money at Vegas?  This guy us a failure, a losing gambler, and now Obama appoints him head of OMB.    You are ok with that? 

Unreal.


kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
KC - please tell me how this guy is any different than the guy who obama said should not go blow the college money at Vegas?  This guy us a failure, a losing gambler, and now Obama appoints him head of OMB.    You are ok with that? 

Unreal.



So you're okay with writing off a man with vast amounts of experience working in the OMB because he, like millions of others, lost money during the recession?  That is unreal.   

Perhaps you should read into their backgrounds before jumping on the first trumped up hyperbole your greasy little fingers can find.  It may not result in as many wet dreams about Obama's failure but it would save you from continuing to look insane and unstable. 
Abandon every hope...

kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
Lets also not forget your love affair with Peter Schiff, who himself, lost large sums of clients money in 2008.  WSJ "made mincemeat of investors who took his advice in 2008"

Yet you follow him around like a 60's Beatles groupie snapped camera phone pics for all to see.  But apparently only this guy, who has ample experience, is a bad fit for office. 
Abandon every hope...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
So you're okay with writing off a man with vast amounts of experience working in the OMB because he, like millions of others, lost money during the recession?  That is unreal.   

Perhaps you should read into their backgrounds before jumping on the first trumped up hyperbole your greasy little fingers can find.  It may not result in as many wet dreams about Obama's failure but it would save you from continuing to look insane and unstable. 

1.  This guy lost 20 Billion dollars and you are ok with him running omb? 

2.  No one put Schiff up for the spot. 

3.  HP is now hyperbole?

4.  Obama is a failure - get over it.   

kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
Big company, big losses.  I'm okay with him running OMB because he did it under Clinton very successfully.  Whatever his citibank results they must be seen in context.  The context being a massive recession that hit almost all investors and their advisers including your all time favorite Schiff.  Without context and understanding you're missing a key point. 

But that would force you to rationally think about something without jumping to a conclusion and look at the big picture.  Something i don't think is your strong point.

BTW whatever Obama is or isn't has nothing to do with this guy being able to run the OMB because he's done it so well before. 

 
Abandon every hope...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Unreal.  Yet you, Blacken, Mons, et al claim its only the GOP owned by wall street. 

Your dumb ass will go to the polls in 2012 truly beleiving Obama is on your side and its only the evil GOP against you. 

Pathetic.   

kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
Haha i don't think Obama is on my side at all.  I think he is a politician and like all politicians he plays the game of politics.  Passing blame, helping those who help him, 'beating up' the good to be extra good etc. 

The problem is though 333 you're so blinded you don't take things in context.  You don't see the big picture and you fail to see this is actually a great appointment.  Regardless of who made it. 
Abandon every hope...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Haha i don't think Obama is on my side at all.  I think he is a politician and like all politicians he plays the game of politics.  Passing blame, helping those who help him, 'beating up' the good to be extra good etc. 

The problem is though 333 you're so blinded you don't take things in context.  You don't see the big picture and you fail to see this is actually a great appointment.  Regardless of who made it. 

GMAFB KC - stop shilling for this organized crime gang known as the obama Admn. 

"Big Picture"? ? ?   - Like Geithner, Summers, Salazar, Holdren, Sunstein, Kagan, Berwick, Van Jones, Wright, Dunn, et al? 

Please - Obama is a disgusting pofs who was put in office by dolts like yourself who see one thing, race, and that's it.  If his name were Barry O'Malley - he would be in a jail cell for life for what he is doing. 

kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
Oh please.  This thread is about one person - Jack Lew.  He worked from the OMB during the clinton years, did a great job and now he's back under a different admin. 

You're really clutching here 333 and slipping more and more into conjecture and hyperbole.  This guy helped us run a great budget, obviously knows how to work with both sides and has a proven track record in civil service.  But please lets take things out of context and continue to either make things up or jump to conclusions without understanding all the facts.

Remember this when Jack Lew left the White House as President Bill Clinton’s budget director, the annual federal budget surplus stood at $236 billion.

So don't try to tell me this is a bad appointment or that this guy doesn't know what he's doing because he lost some money during a volatile time. 
Abandon every hope...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Oh please.  This thread is about one person - Jack Lew.  He worked from the OMB during the clinton years, did a great job and now he's back under a different admin. 

You're really clutching here 333 and slipping more and more into conjecture and hyperbole.  This guy helped us run a great budget, obviously knows how to work with both sides and has a proven track record in civil service.  But please lets take things out of context and continue to either make things up or jump to conclusions without understanding all the facts.

Remember this when Jack Lew left the White House as President Bill Clinton’s budget director, the annual federal budget surplus stood at $236 billion.

So don't try to tell me this is a bad appointment or that this guy doesn't know what he's doing because he lost some money during a volatile time. 

There never was a surplus.  The national debt rose every year. 

The only reason the govt got so much revenue was the capital gains tax reciepts from stock transactions from the dot com boom, which went bust as Clinton left office.   

Track record? ? ? ?  This guy just lost $20 Billion on bad bets, sorry, my standards are a little higher than yours. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Bump for 240!!!!!!

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Hey 240 - where were you on this bro?????

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
hell yes, conflict of interest.  indict his ass.

settle down 33, I miss getbig for 8 hours and youre bumping like two blind gerbils in heat here.   ;D

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Here is Obama's new Chief of Staff.   



HOAX AND CHAINS! ! ! ! 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama's OMB Pick Oversaw Citi Unit That Shorted Housing Market - (UPDATED)
« Reply #18 on: January 09, 2012, 03:13:21 PM »
New Chief of Staff: Former Hedge Fund Exec. at Citigroup, Made Money Off Mortgage Defaults
5:56 PM, Jan 9, 2012 • By DANIEL HALPERS

 


         
     
    President Obama's first chief of staff Rahm Emanuel once sat on the board of troubled federal mortgage giant Freddie Mac. Bill Daley, the president's chief of staff whose departure was announced today, was previously a top executive at financial firm J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. So of course there should be little surprise that Obama's latest chief of staff, announced today by the president himself, also has deep ties to the financial industry himself.



From 2006-2008, Jack Lew was chief operating officer of Citibank's alternative investments division. And it was his division that made billions of dollars betting "U.S. homeowners would not be able to make their mortgage payments," as the Huffington Post reported.

The piece also reported: “Lew made millions at Citi, including a bonus of nearly $950,000 in 2009 just a few months after the bank received billions of dollars in a taxpayer rescue, according to disclosure forms filed with the federal government. The bank is still partly owned by taxpayers.”

Of course, one should not begrudge Lew his personal, professional, and financial successes. But one might wonder what kind of message the president is sending with this appointment.

“I welcome constructive input from folks in the financial sector. But what we’ve seen so far, in recent weeks, is an army of industry lobbyists from Wall Street descending on Capitol Hill to try and block basic and common-sense rules of the road that would protect our economy and the American people,” Obama said in 2010. “So if these folks want a fight, that’s a fight I’m ready to have.”



http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/new-chief-staff-former-hedge-fund-exec-citigroup-made-money-mortgage-defaults_616230.html


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama's OMB Pick Oversaw Citi Unit That Shorted Housing Market - (UPDATED)
« Reply #19 on: January 09, 2012, 07:34:51 PM »
Incoming Chief of Staff Jack Lew's Past Statements Coming Under Fire
Big Government ^ | 1/9/12 | Wynton Hall
Posted on January 9, 2012 10:37:16 PM EST by Nachum

President Obama’s decision today to replace White House chief of staff William Daley with the director of the Office of Management and Budget Jack Lew is raising eyebrows on Capitol Hill as Washington watchers recall Mr. Lew’s past statements.

On Feb. 13, 2011, Mr. Lew appeared on CNN’s State of the Union with Candy Crowley and said of Mr. Obama’s proposed budget:

Our budget will get us, over the next several years, to the point where we can look the American people in the eye and say we’re not adding to the debt anymore; we’re spending money that we have each year, and then we can work on bringing down our national debt.

Mr. Lew’s statement was deemed “false” by the nonpartisan, Pulitzer Prize-winning PolitiFact.com.

“The contention that ‘we will not be adding more to the national debt’ after the middle of the decade seems incorrect on its face,” reported PolitiFact. “So what is the administration thinking?”

(Excerpt) Read more at biggovernment.com ...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama's OMB Pick Oversaw Citi Unit That Shorted Housing Market - (UPDATED)
« Reply #20 on: January 10, 2012, 11:50:52 AM »
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jul/28/omb-nominee-got-900000-after-citigroup-bailout/?page=all




Hope and FUCKING CHANGE you commie pinko traitors.! ! ! !


Live it , love it, and go vote for this shit show again you assholes.   

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Obama's OMB Pick Oversaw Citi Unit That Shorted Housing Market - (UPDATED)
« Reply #23 on: February 13, 2012, 08:02:55 AM »
White House Spin Machine Hits Brick Wall
S.C. Hotline ^ | 2/13/2012 | Mike Brownfield

Posted on Monday, February 13, 2012 10:54:22 AM by IbJensen

Yesterday, the newest White House chief of staff, Jack Lew, took to the Sunday talk shows to get a head start on promoting President Barack Obama’s FY2013 budget, which is set to be released today. But just as he was getting warmed up, Lew ran smack into a brick wall when he was forced to defend the Democrat-controlled Senate’s failure to pass a budget in the last 1,019 days.

“You can’t pass a budget in the Senate of the United States without 60 votes, and you can’t get 60 votes without bipartisan support,” Lew said on CNN’s State of the Union. “So unless… unless Republicans are willing to work with Democrats in the Senate, [Majority Leader] Harry Reid is not going to be able to get a budget passed.” Lew repeated the claim in a slightly different form on NBC’s Meet the Press, saying “One of the things about the United States Senate that I think the American people have realized is that it takes 60, not 50, votes to pass something.”

The trouble is, Lew is absolutely wrong. As ABC’s Jake Tapper points out, budgets only require 51 Senate votes for passage. The Washington Post‘s “Fact Checker” Glenn Kessler weighed in as well, saying that Lew, who is a two-time budget director, “really should know better.” When Tapper called the White House on the error, hesays that they didn’t deny that Lew was wrong and instead spun back to blaming “general gridlock in Congress that makes accomplishing even the most basic tasks nearly impossible.”

The issue, though, is bigger than whether or not Lew twisted the truth about a procedural matter that probably escapes the interest of the vast majority of Americans. The issue is that President Obama and his allies in Congress continue to take a pass on governing by refusing to address one of the biggest issues of our time: a looming fiscal crisis that will leave Americans saddled with unacceptable levels of spending and debt. According to Congressional Budget Office long-term projections, spending will rise to as much as 34 percent of GDP, with deficits at a post-war record of 15.5 percent of GDP and debt held by the public nearly twice the size of the entire economy. Heritage’s Patrick Knudsen says President Obama should address these problems head on:

No one expects President Obama to transform into a conservative. But he cannot ignore the fundamental problems of runaway spending and debt, and he can no longer turn these problems over to fiscal commissions or super committees. If his budget for fiscal year (FY) 2013 is to be a credible policy document–not just a public relations pitch–it should:

Show specific proposals for reforming entitlements and reducing other spending not just for the next 10 years but over the long term as well; prevent the devastating cuts in defense that are looming because of the debt-reduction Budget Control Act; offer permanent solutions to the large spending and tax policies that keep vexing lawmakers and the public; and reject phony budget savings and other gimmicks.

Early details of the President’s plan are not promising. It purports to cut the deficit by $3 trillion over the next decade, with more than $1.5 trillion of that coming from new taxes on corporations and wealthy and with no structural changes to entitlements. Already, the President’s plan is drawing fire, with House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) saying, “It seems as if the President is doing little more than class envy and the status quo, which is the greatest threat to our health security, our retirement security, our national security and our economic security.”