Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Just Asking Questions
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Print Subscription
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Politics

Jacob Lew, the White House's New Budget Romantic

Peter Suderman | 7.13.2010 3:51 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Today, the White House announced that Jacob Lew, currently the United States Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources under Hillary Clinton, will replace Peter Orszag as President Obama's director of the Office of Management and Budget. Lew will probably be sold as a politically experienced deficit wrangler, but the picture that emerges from a brief review of his public record is of a dogged budget battler who brings a progressive romantic vision to the sterile business of fiscal prioritizing.

Here's a look at what President Obama likely sees in his newest senior wonk—and what the rest of us should expect:

He sells fiscal discipline as a path to liberal policy goals: In 2000 testimony before Congress, he said: "The fact that we are running a surplus does not mean, however, that fiscal discipline is no longer needed. To the contrary, fiscal discipline is essential to protect Social Security and strengthen Medicare, so that both will be there in the years ahead." Advocates of fiscal restraint might find comfort in the idea of a White House budget director touting the need for fiscal discipline even in times of surplus. But taken as a whole, the quote suggests that Lew's approach very much resembles Orszag's, which at this point ought to be worrying. Orszag, as many will recall, was initially touted as a deficit-conscious centrist. But he successfully sold the administration on the idea that health care reform is entitlement reform—an idea that sounds a lot like Lew's notion that fiscal discipline is a tool for advancing large-scale entitlements—and served as a chief advocate for the so-called fiscal responsibility of ObamaCare.

He's romantic about budgeting: Orszag's press apologists built him a persona defined by nerd-cool. Lew seems like less of a geek and more of a poet. "Budgets aren't books of numbers. They're a tapestry, the fabric, of what we believe." Lew told The New York Times in 1999. "The numbers tell a story, a self-portrait of what we are as a country." So we're spending-crazed entitlement nuts on a path to fiscal catastrophe? Let's not answer that. 

He's a true believer in government power: In the same New York Times piece, Lew said that he believes that "the purpose of power is to get things done,'' which would seem to inform his stated belief "you [can] make a difference in people's lives through politics."

He's a wartime Consiglieri:
From 1998 until 2001, Lew served as OMB director under Bill Clinton, which means he has experience negotiating fiscal priorities with a Republican-controlled Congress. If the GOP overtakes the House this year, as many expect, that experience will definitely come in handy.

He has experience with health care: From February 1993 through 1994, Lew served as a Special Assistant to President Clinton, and was involved in the president's failed effort to overhaul the nation's health care system. Even if you buy the rosiest assumptions about ObamaCare, managing a trillion dollars in new health care funds will be no small challenge. And, as the CBO has laid out in excruciating detail, the nation's long-term fiscal problem is, in fact, largely a health care cost problem. That means that public health care expenses are likely to dominate America's budget debates for years to come.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Free and Fleeting Speech

Peter Suderman is features editor at Reason.

PoliticsPolicyNanny StateBudgetObamacare
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Show Comments (36)

Latest

Hegseth's Alleged Order To 'Kill Everybody' Complicates Trump's Defense of His Murderous Anti-Drug Campaign

Jacob Sullum | 12.1.2025 3:35 PM

Chicago Is the Latest Example of How Public School Spending Doesn't Prioritize Students

Gregory Lyakhov | 12.1.2025 2:00 PM

Livestream: Behind the Scenes With Reason's Libertarian Journalists

Liz Wolfe | 12.1.2025 1:20 PM

To the Socialists of All Parties

Katherine Mangu-Ward | From the January 2026 issue

Lawmakers To Consider 19 Bills for Childproofing the Internet

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 12.1.2025 12:12 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2025 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

HELP EXPAND REASON’S JOURNALISM

Reason is an independent, audience-supported media organization. Your investment helps us reach millions of people every month.

Yes, I’ll invest in Reason’s growth! No thanks
r

I WANT TO FUND FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS

Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.

Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
r

SUPPORT HONEST JOURNALISM

So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.

I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK

Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.

My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
r

HELP KEEP MEDIA FREE & FEARLESS

Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREE MINDS

Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.

Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK AGAINST SOCIALIST IDEAS

Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BAD IDEAS WITH FACTS

Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BAD ECONOMIC IDEAS ARE EVERYWHERE. LET’S FIGHT BACK.

Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

JOIN THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM

Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BACK JOURNALISM THAT PUSHES BACK AGAINST SOCIALISM

Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREEDOM

Your donation supports the journalism that questions big-government promises and exposes failed ideas.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BACK AGAINST BAD ECONOMICS.

Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks