Obama’s ideological fatigue
WASHINGTON — President Obama’s second inaugural address and his recent State of the Union have been described as “two acts in the same play.” They are matched “bookends.” They belong together “like bagels and toothpaste.”
Actually, that last characterization is mine. It is difficult to imagine two more different speeches in intention or ambition. The inaugural presented Obama’s unvarnished progressivism as the culmination of the American founding. The State of the Union presented a grab bag of proposals, some recycled (infrastructure spending, the Paycheck Fairness Act), some piddling (college affordability scorecards, a few “manufacturing hubs”), most very typical. The revolution of Seneca Falls, Selma and Stonewall evidently arrives with the $9 minimum wage.
The State of the Union also notched down the stridency. Only a few times were Republicans accused of betraying “teachers,” “cops,” “firefighters” and “senior citizens and working families.” By Obama standards, a model of grace.
The speech was Clintonian, which some of us found reassuring. Many of Obama’s largest requests were downright reasonable. The emotional centerpiece of his remarks was a call for votes on three prudent, incremental gun control measures. He challenged Republicans to return to a position on climate disruption that many held only a few years ago. He embraced the possibility of an “AIDS-free generation,” which should (one would hope) find support on both sides of the aisle. He outlined a centrist position on immigration reform designed to accommodate GOP concerns.
If Republicans find these measures ideologically aggressive, it is only because their ideology has become immoderate.
The main problem with Obama’s State of the Union was not zealotry or overreach; it was a pervasive lack of substance and seriousness.
Obama is exactly right about the sequester scheduled for March 1. Spending reductions that are equally applied are not equally felt—some fall on waste and bureaucracy, others on meat inspectors and the provision of AIDS drugs. Across-the-board cuts are an abdication of governing and moral choice. But, as former Clinton adviser William Galston noted, Obama “urged agreements that would avert these events but offered nothing beyond what he had already put on the table.” The president seemed more interested in setting up blame for the sequester than avoiding it.
Obama is generally right on the two elements of an eventual agreement to stabilize the finances of the government—broad tax reform that closes loopholes and health entitlement reform. In his speech, he correctly noted that, on our current path, “retirement programs will crowd out the investments we need for our children.” Yet he proceeded to dismiss the urgency of deficit reduction and embrace policies that only address the short-term need.
“Obama appears to have decided,” says Galston, “that there is no possibility of resolving the larger fiscal issues on terms that he and his party would find acceptable.”
Obama is right in tackling the problem of economic mobility—the need to “build new ladders of opportunity into the middle class for all who are willing to climb them.” And he raised some unavoidable issues: early childhood education and job training. But, so far, there are no details attached to these proposals that would allow an assessment of their seriousness and cost.
Such vagueness suffused the speech. If Congress refuses to move on climate change, Obama didn’t promise to act. He promised to “direct my Cabinet to come up with executive actions.” He didn’t pledge voting rights enforcement. He proposed “a nonpartisan commission to improve the voting experience in America.” Instead of proposing actual plans, he issued “a new goal for America: Let’s cut in half the energy wasted by our homes and businesses,” and “a new challenge to redesign America’s high schools.
“We’ll work with local leaders,” he said, “to target resources at public safety” and “my administration will begin to partner with 20 of the hardest-hit towns.”
Executive directives like these—“my administration will begin to partner”—involve a diminution of the executive and indicate a weak policy process. It is something I occasionally encountered when I was head of White House speechwriting. The word goes out to the Energy Department: We need a proposal. The idea comes back: “Tonight I am instructing my distinguished energy secretary to convene a blue-ribbon panel that will study a cooperative process with state and local officials to set the goal of redesigning the American energy experience within 10 years.”
Such ideas are typical products of government. Including them in the State of the Union address is a sign of ideological fatigue.
Michael Gerson is a columnist for the Washington Post Writers Group; email michaelgerson@washpost.com.
Feb 17, 2013 at 11:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
Our country goes over the fiscal cliff in less than 2 weeks and wouldn't you like a leader who would say, "I'll meet with anybody, anywhere, any time to get some resolutions to this cataclysmic problem." No, he says " I'd rather take a vacation to Florida and play golf!"
Feb 17, 2013 at 11:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
And he's so worn out from working so hard in DC he is playing golf today with Tigermin FLORIDA! Must be tough! I remember when Bush had enough class to quit playing golf after 9/11. Obama has no such class! Just being the Emporer!
Feb 17, 2013 at 6:32 a.m.
Suggest removal
oneday.....his approval rating now is 49% according to CNN, lower than any other president in modern times at the start of a second term.
Feb 16, 2013 at 2:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
donnaw...the 1% I mentioned has absolutely nothing to do with Obama's approval rating, which by the way is currently at 52%.
Feb 16, 2013 at 2:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
gandie....so why go to Florida where there is sunshine, golf, etc? If he isn't trying to get away from it all, why run up the hundreds of thousands of $ it will cost to fly him and his entourage to Florida? So you think he will sit in his room and talk on the phone and text? And that is as effective as having discussions face to face with the decision makers? I get it, phone in your job. He was elected and hired to do a job and I don't think he's being the LEADER you Obamaphiles think he is.
Feb 16, 2013 at 2:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
Reading comprehension donnaw...He is not divulging details at this point only to have them shot down before he has the support of the people. That's part of his plan, again..he's playing chess and you only understand checkers.
Feb 16, 2013 at 12:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
And why doesn't he stay in DC and WORK OUT THE DETAILS instead of going on another vacation!
Feb 16, 2013 at 12:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
So he is taking his policy plans on the road to the voters but yet he has no details? Sounds like a plan to me. Is this like Pelosi's opinion that "we have to pass it to see what's in it." So we have to just take his word that this is a good plan and trust him to fill in the blank spaces. Sounds kind of condescending to me. And as far as the 1% you mention, Obama has the lowest first term approval rating of any president in modern times, not even averaging 50% but about 48%. So that means not even half the country approved of his first term.
Feb 16, 2013 at 11:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
Not to put a damper on such non-partisan positive comments.....buuut did any of you actually read the article. Here is a Republican who has maneuvered the maze of politics is D.C. for decades saying "If Republicans find these measures ideologically aggressive, it is only because their ideology has become immoderate."
Once again Obama is playing chess while the radical Republicans and Tea Party are playing checkers. He's taking it to the people. Once he gets people on board with his proposals,moderate, necessary and beneficial to the middle class, the people can put pressure on Congress to act. As the article said "But, so far, there are no details attached to these proposals that would allow an assessment of their seriousness and cost." Obama is is laying the ground work. When the people get behind Obama he will release the details then the whack jobs in Congress won't look good when they once again start right away with being oppositional just to be oppositional to Obama; It will appear they are being oppositional to what the people want. The few of you "same old same old" Obama bashers who post here,are a relatively small segment of our society. The majority of people are reasonable and willing to compromise. Compromise is how things get done. The reason Congress is so dysfunctional is because of the radical Republicans who don't understand that. You have been very vocal and have been able to influence up to this point. Most Americans are beginning to see the Tea Party for what they are, extreme,unreasonable and most of all uninformed/misinformed. This country finally has a President who is for the people and you are obstructing your own best interest because you have allowed the 1% to be your puppeteers and use you as pawns to further empower the 1% to buy even more influence in Govt.
Feb 16, 2013 at 10:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
Trust me, America has been fatigued by this man they call Obama.
Feb 16, 2013 at 9:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
Obama's puppeteer is "satan"
Feb 16, 2013 at 6:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
MBHammer The puppeterer above Obamas head is called The Illuminati. 95% of society has not a clue as to what is going on behind the scenes.
Feb 16, 2013 at 6:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
And talk about not wanting to work in the trenches, he and entourage have gone on another vacation! What an arrogant and hypocritical man! And now another famous democrat bites the dust as we hear about Jesse Jackson who has pleaded guilty to charges and will spend time in prison. Jesse, Sr must be so proud. How does Chicago produce so many crooked politicians?
Feb 16, 2013 at 6:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
He's a delusional fool. An ideological nightmare. (He's a politician!)
Feb 15, 2013 at 9:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
Obama is a demagogue of the first degree. Listening to him is like listening to the adults in a Charlie Brown cartoon, " Wha wha whaaaa, wha, wwhhaaa.." The man has no real life experience; he's never had to really earn a living working hard. He relies on his charm and charisma to keep himself in power. He's the great Divider in Chief.
Feb 15, 2013 at 8:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
I would like to learn the identity of the puppeteer above Obama's head.
Feb 15, 2013 at 1:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
Now Obama's favorite word is "invest". It doesn't matter what word he uses to describe his idiotic plans, if he doesn't engage in the process it means nothing. He's arrogant and stubborn. Reid and the Senate haven't presented a budget bill in 4 years. Why doesn't Obama do something about that? The House has voted on and submitted several bills but Reid won't let those bills go to the Senate floor. Why doesn't Obama do something about that? Stop hating on the Republicans when Obama doesn't have the guts to stand up to Reid and his sidekick Pelosi. I think the community organizer comes out in Obama because he doesn't want to roll up his sleeves and get in the trenches. He'd rather think of these bright (lol) ideas and preach about how bad the Republicans are. Fact is, he doesn't want to do the hard work. He'd rather talk and talk and talk about it.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.