800 billion today approximately 13 of GDP

Economist Jeffrey d. Sachs, Director of the Earth Institute of Columbia University, Barack Obama is the first President for thirty years to be able to give a decisive impetus to structural reforms which America was badly needed. But it is a critical look at the policy of Keynesian stimulus in the short term of his economic team.

What do you think of the beginnings of Barack Obama Can we talk about a "Obama method" at this stage

He demonstrated that he had the potential to be a great President. At the same time do not forget that many current American problems have deep political roots and that not everything can change with the arrival of a new President. He has a constructive vision of America's place in the overall policy. He has turned his back to unilateralism. He is very calm, measured, and it has a calming effect in multilateral negotiations. He was the art of listening to others and to reach a compromise. He knows that he can no longer enter the fist on the table to defend American interests in a multipolar world. So far, it had a significant impact on foreign policy. I'm more reserved on the economic front, where there are more and some less. I am more favourable to structural reforms in the long term to some short-term macroeconomic measures.

On the economic front, how do you explain some apparent hesitation

The internal situation is very complicated. We experienced a period of fiscal paralysis for thirty years. The American political system is not really flexible. We have a chronic deficit and there is no consensus to overcome this situation. The Senate now requires a 60 majority to pass legislation. Constant tactical use of the filibuster (filibustering) changed the political landscape and makes it much more difficult reforms. Despite the spirit of openness of Barack Obama, the Republicans are opposed to all its initiatives to date. There has certainly been tactical errors. I've never been very partisan of the stimulus package, which is to come adds a considerable deficit inherited from George Bush. We now have a deficit of 1.800 billion today, approximately 13 of GDP. I am afraid that this deficit paralyzes any structural reform. Everything could be blocked on the grounds that the budget is out of control.

How do explain that Congress has not issued any objection to the adoption of this expensive boost

The fear of depression has certainly played. In addition, the new President had claimed it with insistence and there are also a number of popular programs in this stimulus package. For my part, I am much more in the budget plan over 10 years on renewable energy, climate change, health and education. This is what I prefer in the approach of the new administration. We need long-term reforms in this country and I am afraid that the recovery plan is likely to jeopardize. Already, during the campaign, I thought that there was a risk to say that all of these reforms could be performed at a constant level of fiscal pressure. Barack Obama came to power with the promise that he would not raise taxes for 95 of the population. This seems largely unrealistic. But in America, we are so allergic to the tax that thirty years that it is not honest discussion on this topic. I fear that this could weaken the administration over time. We should have a VAT in this country and increase the tax on income (3-5 points of GDP) on a structural basis for repairing the healthcare system, overcome the absence of a safety net or funding the development of renewable energy.