Desperately Needed: A Strong Treasury Department

By :: February 13th, 2013

Alexander Hamilton, the first Secretary of the Treasury, set the bar very high. The Senate is about to begin debate over President Obama’s nomination of Jack Lew to be Treasury Secretary. Lately, confirmation hearings have often focused on either the personal foibles of candidates or relatively evanescent policy disputes. But at a time when fiscal policy is so critical to the nation's well-being, the Senate should not forget the critical role Treasury has played in forging that agenda.

The key question for the Senate: will Treasury continue to play that powerful role under Lew’s stewardship?

While Hamilton could be mercurial and even buffoonish in his monarchial tendencies and late military ambitions, he was extraordinarily visionary in molding institutions and organizations to meet the fiscal needs of the new nation. Whether writing Federalist Papers or engaging in the nation’s first Grand Bargain on the budget, his prescient gaze stretched far into the future, finding limitless possibility for this great nation.

Perhaps nowhere is his legacy more embodied than in the Treasury Department that he helped create and nurture to handle the nation’s debt obligations, taxes, and its budget. That legacy has been threatened by a modern department weakened by the usurpation of its functions.

Remember that the president is the only elected official our founders explicitly tasked to represent the nation as a whole. We expect partisanship among members of Congress because they represent different constituencies, though today the influence of special interests transcends congressional boundaries. The Chamber of Commerce, AARP, National Rifle Association, and AFL-CIO each understand the levers of power, even to the point of knowing how to scare an entire legislature to inaction.  I’m not saying that these groups don’t have views worthy of consideration, but they do not—I repeat, do not—represent the “general welfare” that our Constitution explicitly mentions in its preamble and its taxing and spending clause.

Interestingly, one of the earliest fights between our political parties was over whether the federal government should get involved in arenas like agriculture or education. Both sides agreed that if such spending took place, it should be in the general interest and not favor any specific section of the country over another. Today, particular constituencies are the dominant beneficiaries of many spending and tax subsidy programs. Does anyone really think that subsidies for sugar growers or early retirees or owners of oil companies and expensive vacation homes serve the general welfare?

When it comes to spending, taxing, and budgeting in the modern era—especially when the government has made too many promises to too many people—the Treasury Department remains the only agency that can restore order by offering broad reform packages centered on the general welfare.

Treasury sits in the unique position of having to worry about paying for things. It alone must deal with the “take-away” side of the budget ledger, constantly confronting how to administer taxes or float bonds. It’s in its very blood to balance potential benefits with costs and reduce politicians’ incentive to operate on the “give-away” side of the budget by enacting tax cuts and spending increases for which future generations will have to pay.

One other part to solving our fiscal puzzle involves understanding the role of committees or assemblies of politicians. The role of these groups is to approve, not design, policy, and delegating that latter function to them neglects the role of the executive. There was a reason fiscal policy shifted to a strong Treasury and away from the committees operating under the weak Articles of Confederation.

In assuming the executive role of Treasury Secretary, will Jack Lew follow Hamilton’s example by leaving a stronger Treasury as a legacy? Will he help move us down a viable path for getting out of our current fiscal mess? I suggest he is unlikely to succeed at one without accomplishing the other.

A longer version of this column is available at my blog, The Government We Deserve.


  1. Tax Roundup, 2/13/2013: The President wants more taxes. Because they’re doing such a good job with what they get now. « Roth & Company, P.C  ::  9:39 am on February 13th, 2013:

    […] Gene Steurle, Desperately Needed: A Strong Treasury Department (TaxVox) […]

  2. Vivian Darkbloom  ::  11:23 am on February 13th, 2013:

    “Remember that the president is the only elected official our founders explicitly tasked to represent the nation as a whole.”

    True; however, this begs the question as to whether the President (or many of his predecessors) have actually lived up to that task in practice. It strikes me that the sitting president has been very highly partisan in his representation of “the nation as a whole”—more so than any President in my memory.

    The Treasury Department is, of course, a part of the Executive branch. Presumably, Mr. Steuerle is arguing that the Treasury Department, headed by the next Secretary, should be “powerful” in the sense (or it least partly in the sense) that it should be impervious to partisan politics and thus should serve the longer-term economic interests of “the nation as a whole”.

    Mr. Lew’s experience and personal qualifications for that task, or the lack thereof, are one thing. However, with respect to minimizing the partisan politics and “representing the nation as a whole”, I find it troublesome that his main qualification seems to be that he is one of the top political insiders of the current administration. That, I think, does not bode well for Mr. Steuerle’s vision.

  3. Michael Bindner  ::  9:01 pm on February 13th, 2013:

    It depends on whom he puts in the Office of Tax Policy, as you very well know. Will he staff it with experts with no agenda, or will he allow some sort of plan to come out that combines the best of analysis and originality? I don’t expect anything as radical as my plan be proposed, however it would be nice if they would give it a look (or if TPC would do the same thing).

  4. test  ::  1:40 pm on March 17th, 2013:

    Thanks , I’ve just been looking for info about this topic for ages and yours is the best I’ve discovered till now. But, what about the bottom line? Are you sure about the source?