Hillarysworld -> Obama and Congress -> "Change We Can Believe In - It's time for the president to stop legislating and start leading" (Newsweek 1/22/10)
Post Info
TOPIC: "Change We Can Believe In - It's time for the president to stop legislating and start leading" (Newsweek 1/22/10)
How bad do things look for Barack Obama? Some historical perspective is useful. His approval ratings after one year in office are about the same as Ronald Reagan's or Jimmy Carter's and, in fact, are a bit higher than Bill Clinton's. The Bushes fared better than all three of them, but for unusual reasons: 41 because he presided over the collapse of the Soviet Union in his first year in office, and 43 because the nation rallied around him after 9/11. As the economy improves, Obama's numbers will surely rebound somewhat.
A great debate has begun on the nature of that response. My own advice would be simple: Barack Obama needs to act like a president, especially the president he campaigned to become.
In his enduring treatise, The American Commonwealth, James Bryce, a British writer who toured the United States in the late 19th century, observed that the Founding Fathers had created a president who would, in a crucial sense, resemble the British king, "not only in being the head of the executive, but in standing apart from and above political parties. He was to represent the nation as a whole … The independence of his position, with nothing either to gain or to fear from Congress, would, it was hoped, leave him free to think only of the welfare of the people."
Obama began his presidency in this vein. In his response to the economic crisis, he steered a clear middle course, refusing to accept the left's cries for bank nationalization but also adopting a far more vigorous and Keynesian approach than the right could accept. In foreign policy, he reset America's image in the world in a manner that earned him kudos from the likes of James Baker and Brent Scowcroft. But that broader, presidential approach was partly set aside in passing the fiscal stimulus and then abandoned altogether in the drive to change the American health-care system.
Over the past six months—which have correlated with his dramatic drop in the polls—Obama has behaved less like a president and more like a prime minister. He has not outlined a broad vision for the country. He has not embraced the best solutions—from left and right—for the nation's problems. Instead he has behaved as the head of the Democratic Party in Congress, working almost entirely with and through that caucus, slicing and dicing policy proposals to cobble together legislative majorities. He has allowed the great policy program of his presidency to be written and defined by a collection of congressional Democrats, accepting the lopsided bills that emerged and the corruption inherent in the process.
If he represents all the people, Obama should remember that for 85 percent of Americans, the great health-care crisis is about cost. For about 15 percent, it is about extending coverage. Yet his plan does little about the first and focuses mostly on the second. It promotes too little of the real discipline that would force costs down, and instead throws in a few ideas, experiments, and pilot programs that could, over time and if rigorously expanded, do so. It is a bill written by legislators to ensure that they never have to do anything unpopular. (Emphasis added)
[snip]
True, the Republican Party has decided to be utterly uncooperative (although on health care Obama never really reached out to them with serious compromises). But whether or not Republican senators would at first reward Obama for adopting a more nonpartisan approach, independent voters would, which would change the political calculus in Washington. Rahm Emanuel quipped that the task was not to get health-care legislation through "the executive committee of the Brookings Institution, but the U.S. Congress." In fact, proposals that would impress experts would also impress tens of millions of independents, the vast middle ground where elections are won and lost in America. That is how Bill Clinton outmaneuvered Newt Gingrich, and how Tony Blair outfoxed the Tory party for 10 years.
[snip] He promised that he would reach out to all sections of the country, listen to the best ideas, and appeal to the nation as a whole."I don't see a blue America and a red America, I see only the United States of America," he said. Obama needs to shift course and govern as the president he promised to become. That's change I could believe in.
Fareed Zakaria is a highly respected journalist. I am glad to see him call the President on his promises.
It is time for the President to realize the home truth about America. We like promise-keepers.
Zakaria also points to some basic facts about key stakeholder concerns on health care reform - cost (for 85% of the population) and continuity of coverage (for 15% of the population).
Leadership has its task cut out.
We do want the change we can believe in.
-- Edited by Sanders on Monday 25th of January 2010 08:23:22 PM
__________________
Democracy needs defending - SOS Hillary Clinton, Sept 8, 2010 Democracy is more than just elections - SOS Hillary Clinton, Oct 28, 2010
Hillarysworld -> Obama and Congress -> "Change We Can Believe In - It's time for the president to stop legislating and start leading" (Newsweek 1/22/10)