The national debt is not usually news.

Except when it's not increased by the time the government's existing debt ceiling is reached and the Treasury has to do some interesting things to manage cash flow, federal borrowing is seldom widely reported. When it is, it's usually only of interest to Wall Street and mentioned mostly by financial outlets like Bloomberg, Marketplace, CNBC, etc.

This has been especially the case in recent years as the White House has tried to dampen public and media interest in anything having to do with the budget, fiscal policy, and federal finances. By not talking about it, the administration has tried to convince everyone that it's not an issue.

Pete started this. Let me add a few quick thoughts.

I'm a big CNBC fan, but the way they covered the Treasury secretary's formal announcement yesterday of a financial services reform plan after a weekend of informal releases was close to yellow journalism. Not only was there little new to report by the time Secretary Paulson stepped up the microphone, by then it was also clear that this was not going to be adopted this year, or perhaps ever.

First, you had a major proposal by a lame duck administration with very low approval ratings facing a hostile House and Senate controlled by a different political party.

Second, you had a very contententious plan that even its supporters agree won't do much to deal with the current situation before Election Day.

Steve Forbes' Monday (3/17/08) morning interview on CNBC deserves comment because he recommended ignoring market valuations and urged federal intervention in currency markets that would cost U.S. taxpayers a lot of money.

Forbes recommended suspending the SEC's "mark to market" valuation rules for U.S. financial firms because many products, mortgage-backed securities in particular, are not trading now, or are trading a unusually low valuations. The rules allow the use of computer model valuations when there are no market prices, which Forbes also dismissed. This is unusual behavior for a staunch adherent of the "free market."

The irony is unmistakable and almost unbelievable.

As you watch and read the reports about what Wall Street people are saying the federal government should do to make the current economic situation better and avoid an even worse problem, you can't help but wonder what happened to their capitalist and free market credentials.  The same people who, when times are good, not-so-politely insist the government must have as small a role as possible in the economy and criticize those who dare suggest that legislation and regulation are necessary, are now demanding that Washington get heavily involved because things aren't going so well.

Steve Forbes, who usually routinely rails against Washington involvement in the economy, yesterday became the poster child for this view when, during an interview on CNBC, provided a laundry list of things the government needed to do immediately.

Wall Street constantly complains about how Washington incessantly debates issues instead of acting on them.  That's why its almost comical to watch the current situation as Wall Street continues to debate whether there is or will be a recession while Washington has already enacted legislation to deal with it.

Unlike some of the others you see on TV, Steve Liesman, the economist-in-chief at CNBC, is an excellent reporter (Full disclosure: I know Steve and for years have had the opportunity to talk with him in front of and behind the camera).

Even a PR guy (my day job) like me is truly impressed by what Greenspan's publisher has been able to do to launch his book.

Front page stories in The Wall Street Journal and Washington Post on Saturday, a interview on 60 Minutes Sunday night, an interview on the Today Show on Monday morning that was simulcast and CNBC, a separate interview with CNBC senior economics correspondent Steve Liesman, a special with Maria Bartiromo on CNBC Monday night, and on and on and on and...