Short on detail

The US stimulus package raises more questions than it answers. The administration needs to figure out the details, writes The New York Times.

The New York Times

Someone should have told Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner that the one thing to avoid at a time of uncertainty is raising more questions.

When he announced the Obama administration’s new-and-improved bank bailout plan ... Mr. Geithner certainly seemed to have digested some of the flaws in the Bush administration’s rescue attempt — especially the lack of accountability and transparency in how taxpayers’ dollars were spent. Unfortunately, the rest of his speech invited, at best, healthy skepticism from the markets, the public and lawmakers — and at worst, more mistrust. ...

Mr. Geithner and the Obama team have not given enough detail on their approach to foster a productive debate. Nor have they explained why it is better than other ideas. For instance, why not focus the bulk of subsidies on homeowners rather than private investors in banks? The money would get funneled through the banks either way, but a larger public purpose may be served by focusing more on homeowners. Why does a public-private partnership to shore up crippled banks serve the public interest better than having the government restructure banks that would fail without government support?

The lead-balloon reception of Mr. Geithner’s plan is unfortunate because the success of the stimulus is intertwined with the success of the bank bailout. The administration has to figure out the details — and get back to the public with answers.