Governing in the Age of Obama

I believe it was film critic Roger Ebert who said, “You review the movie you saw, not the movie you wanted made.” We should use the same approach in judging President Obama’s first year in office.

Candidate Obama ran on hope and change and his inauguration last January stimulated the imagination of his supporters. A year later, the word “disappointment” is often used to evaluate President Obama’s first year in office.

If we work under the principle of reviewing who President Obama is, rather than the President Obama we would like him to be, then his first year cannot be considered a disappointment.

In 2008, the Democratic Party had two distinctive candidates running for president. Senator Hillary Clinton was the candidate who would fight on every issue. Senator Obama was the candidate who would be able to bring people together to solve our problems. It was a choice between a steamroller and a conciliator.

I believed electing Mr. Obama president of the United States would restore our image throughout the world because the election would demonstrate we prevailed over our original sin of slavery and racism.

In that sense, his first year was a success. President Obama perceives other world leaders as equals. He has demonstrated a willingness to work with other countries on various global issues. He listens instead of dictating policy like his predecessors. No wonder he is more popular overseas than he is in the United States.

President Obama has a gift, an ability to listen and work with others. This ability may work well in foreign policy, but it is not working well domestically. It is not entirely his fault. Structural problems within our government have nullified his ability.

President Obama is not a steamroller. It is not his nature to force others to accept his position. He believes in argument and persuasion and he will not make a decision until he has heard and analyzed everybody’s opinion.

The Conservative opposition’s notion that President Obama is a radical who intends to create a Marxist/fascist state is ridiculous. He campaigned as a centrist, and he has governed as a centrist.

Health care reform is an example of President Obama’s centrist tendencies. He did not want to impose a single payer, Medicare for all health care bill. Instead, President Obama wanted a bill that protected consumers. Furthermore, the single payer legislation would have eliminated the private health care insurance industry. He is trying to regulate the current health care system, not overthrow it.

President Obama believes in bipartisanship. He will stubbornly continue to seek support from Republicans in Congress. It is frustrating to watch President Obama constantly reach out to Senate Republicans, trying to coax at least one vote for his proposals. Republicans continue to reject his efforts, but President Obama is keeping his promise to work with Republicans.

President Obama said he wanted an administration that was willing to embrace ideas from Republicans as well as Democrats.

Negotiations over last year’s stimulus package was an example of President Obama’s willingness to consider Republican ideas. Most economists argued the stimulus bill should be a pure jobs bill aimed at so-called “shovel ready projects.” Republicans argued for tax cuts. The same economists counter argued that tax cuts were not necessary. Tax cuts would lessen the impact of the stimulus bill. President Obama listened to the Republicans and included tax cuts in the stimulus bill. President Obama’s concession to the Republicans was for naught because they voted against the stimulus bill.

President Obama does not lead in a vacuum. He shares power with Congress, and the Senate is responsible for government inaction during Obama’s first year in office.

Before the inauguration, Senator Harry Reid said that the Senate was not going to rollover for President Obama. That was a bold statement considering the Democrats in the Senate allowed President Bush to prosecute a false war against Iraq.

For a brief period in late 2009 and early 2010, Democrats had 60 seats in the Senate, enough to defeat a filibuster. Even with this tactical advantage, the Senate was unable to pass health care reform in a timely manner.

The problems in the Senate are structural. Senate Republicans have adopted former First Lady Nancy Reagan’s anti-drug mantra of “Just Say No” as a political tactic, and have colluded to vote against President Obama’s proposals. Republicans are forcing the Democrats to vote as a bloc to stop filibusters and enact legislation.

The Republican Party is acting like the Sunnis in Iraq. The Sunnis initially refused to participate in the new Iraqi government. They wanted to continue ruling Iraq, like they did before the American invasion. Republicans do not want to cooperate. They want to run the country, like they did from 2001 to 2006.

Before President Obama, a simple majority (51 votes) was needed to pass legislation. Currently, bills need a supermajority (60 votes) to pass.

The problems in the Senate are exacerbated by a weak Majority Leader. Current Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will never be confused with former Senate Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson. Democratic senators are not afraid of Mr. Reid. He cannot impose his will on his colleagues. President Obama would be better served if he had a steamroller as Majority Leader in the Senate.

Republicans are betting the economy will not improve in 2010. Voters will blame President Obama. Republicans are gambling voters will punish the Democrats in the fall.

Republicans are aided and abetted by the Mainstream Media (MSM). President Obama’s failures are exaggerated. Republican talking points have a wide platform, greater than Fox News. President Obama’s birth certificate has received an inordinate amount of attention. Several thousand tea-bag protesters are magnified as a vast movement against President Obama. False notions, like death panels in the health care bill, are given constant coverage, thus making it a legitimate issue to cover. A special election in Massachusetts, to replace deceased Senator Ted Kennedy, won by a Republican is reported as a referendum on President Obama’s policies.

The MSM constantly give a platform to the Republican opposition who use the coverage to portray President Obama’s agenda as radical. Republicans use code words to inflame the public, like radical, socialist, and fascist. Big government becomes totalitarian. Repeat code words enough, and President Obama’s approval ratings will drop.

This tired tactic is not even original. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and current political pundit Bill Kristol used these tactics against the Clinton Administration.

President Obama is not beyond criticism. He prides himself on considering all options before making a decision, but in two instances he did not consider all the options available to him.

First, the health care reform bill. President Obama did not include the single payer option in negotiations with Congress. Also, President Obama did not include a provision to purchase cheaper prescription drugs from Canada and Europe. Furthermore, he did not include a provision to negotiate the cost of prescription drugs with pharmaceutical companies.

Second, the war in Afghanistan. President Obama limited his choices to no escalation, and escalating troop levels by 20, 40 or 60 thousand troops. Withdrawing troops, the best option in my opinion, was never considered.

President Obama has demonstrated the tendency to limit his policy decisions to a group of second best options while completely ignoring the best options. He tries to build consensus by seeking policy options that are not disagreeable.

Liberals and progressives were expecting another FDR, but Mr. Obama never campaigned as a progressive. He wanted to bridge the gap between liberals and conservatives and he’s trying. It is not his fault Republicans are refusing to cooperate.

He wanted to tone down the rhetoric in Washington. President Obama has not resorted to denigrating the opposition, but the Republicans are.

During the presidential campaign, he figured out independent voters were not interested in ideological solutions. Voters wanted someone who could manage the country and the economy. President Obama is trying to be a nonpartisan manager.

President Obama is trying to be the president he campaigned to be. The problem has been governing. The inability to govern is not entirely his fault. President Obama’s most neglected accomplishment during his first year in office was demonstrating our system of government is obsolete and is in need of repair.

Please go to the enclosed link for a list of President Obama’s achievements during his first year: http://mediamatters.org/research/201001270003?lid=1092301&rid=40913829