iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Memo to: The New President


Memo to: The New President

Date: 1/21/2009

From: A Fan

Dear President Obama,

Congratulations! It's was a tough fight, but you did it. Your message of hope, change, and putting this country right with the rest of the world won the day. Some very deep Bush fatigue re: the war and the economy helped a lot too.

I know you're anxious to get to work, but let's take a minute to reflect on how this all came down, and why your message was so resonant. Let me also take you back to some words you spoke way before this election got started, words that I believe set the stage for your historic campaign.

Throughout the summer and fall, one reason your economic message was so well-received was because it was so different from your opponent's. Though he fruitlessly tried to hide it, McCain gave you a wide opening by campaigning on thinly disguised Bushonomics, where the sole solution to every problem is another tax cut tilted toward the wealthiest families. In fact, extending the Bush tax cuts amounted to less than a third of his total cuts.

During the campaign, you insisted he explain how he was going to pay for these cuts without creating unsustainable debt levels (not to mention that these costs didn't even include his plan to keep the war going ad infinitum). Ultimately, he was forced to acknowledge that there's no way he could get there by going after earmarks. He would have had to cut deeply into programs that lots of us care a lot about, including Medicare, Social Security, kids' health care, education, child care, worker training, and so on.


In this regard, your victory hinged partly on voters' view of the role of government in our lives. McCain tried to run as a reformer, and, in fact, the old McCain might have had a decent case to make. But as time went on, it became clear that on most of the key issues--especially the war, the economy, and the role of government--he was stuck in the same bubble as Bush.

He tried to run on experience, but this turned out to be nothing more than a code-word for business as usual. That might have worked if we weren't mired in Iraq abroad and facing a recession at home. Given those realities, it was not hard to make the case that we've tried it their way, and it has failed us miserably.

You, on the other hand, convinced the electorate that there was another way forward. For some of us, that new vision first appeared well before you ran for the presidency, back when you were still finding your way to the Senate lunchroom. It was June of 2005, when you spoke these words:

"Like so much of the American story, once again, we face a choice. Once again, there are those who believe that there isn't much we can do about this as a nation. That the best idea is to give everyone one big refund on their government--divvy it up by individual portions, in the form of tax breaks, hand it out, and encourage everyone to use their share to go buy their own health care, their own retirement plan, their own child care, their own education, and so on.


In Washington, they call this the Ownership Society. But in our past there has been another term for it--Social Darwinism--every man or woman for him or herself. It's a tempting idea, because it doesn't require much thought or ingenuity. It allows us to say that those whose health care or tuition may rise faster than they can afford--tough luck...It let's us say to the child who was born into poverty--pull yourself up by your bootstraps...

But there is a problem. It won't work. It ignores our history. It ignores the fact that it's been government research and investment that made the railways possible and the internet possible. It's been the creation of a massive middle class, through decent wages and benefits and public schools that allowed us all to prosper. Our economic dependence depended on individual initiative. It depended on a belief in the free market; but it has also depended on our sense of mutual regard for each other, the idea that everybody has a stake in the country, that we're all in it together and everybody's got a shot at opportunity."

The first two paragraphs perfectly summed up Bush/McCain's YOYO (you're on your own) philosophy, the one that was solidly rejected in this election. And the third resets the balance between, on the one side, our core individualism and its links to unfettered market forces, and on the other, a WITT (we're in this together) agenda, without which we are nothing more than a bunch of profit-maximizing competitors.

Rebalancing these forces of course calls for major policy changes. I urge you to think big. Your campaign platform featured many great ideas, both large and small. Now's the time for the big ones: think universal health care, not tax credits. Think major infrastructure investment (both "green" and public), not tweaks to trade agreements. Think restored progressivity to the tax code, not closing a loophole or two.

Yet as much as it pains a wonkish DC-insider to say it, policy alone won't take us from YOYO to WITT. You and your new administration need to change the national mindset about the role and competency of government. As it stands, you've convinced enough of us that, unlike your opponent, you deserve a chance to make this country work the way we believe it should.

But talk about your heavy lifts. Bush, Cheney and Co. campaigned on government as a source of massive waste and incompetence, and they've fulfilled their prophecy with great aplomb. McCain strategically tried to make some noises about repairing the damage, but with his platform of tax cuts in the trillions, endless war, and deep cuts to key programs, he couldn't make the case.

To the contrary, this election's results signal a unique historical moment, wherein the majority of voters recognized that we simply can't meet the changes we face without an amply funded and competent federal government. In this regard, you've got a window of opportunity that hasn't been open in years, though one your opponents in Congress will be happy to throw you out of. You can't afford to get off on the wrong foot, the way Bill Clinton did with NAFTA. This means working quickly to unify your party's majority behind the big ideas noted above.

So get some rest, and then let's get started resetting the balance between markets and government, YOYO and WITT, the forces of division, conflict, and violence, and those of hope, unity, and peace.

Months ago, back in June of 2008, in a week when the Senate rejected a plan to tax carbon emissions, when we appeared to be endlessly mired in Iraq, when the unemployment rate spiked more quickly than it had in 22 years, you reminded us someday, we'd be able to tell our children that, "This was the moment--this was the time--when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves, and our highest ideals."

We're ready. Let's do it.

 
 
  • Comments
  • 144
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TheWordPimp
Read my column-From the Bottom Up on TheUrbanTwist
01:43 AM on 06/11/2008
What's with all this "government is good," "government is evil" crap? Government is neither. It is utilitarian at best and oppressive at worst. You people need to stop assuming you "know" everything, or stop listening to pundits. Do yourself a favor and read some Thomas Jefferson or Thomas Paine.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nikto
01:46 PM on 06/10/2008
This country needs a new dictator---THE PEOPLE.
Bladernr1001
Vote Libertarian
10:51 AM on 06/10/2008
So can some tell me how much more in taxes this will cost me?

Oh, and how much more my freedoms will be eroded?
10:06 AM on 06/10/2008
Take a good look at what these liberals want to do. Besides being economically illiterate, they will take us down the sink hole of most of Western Europe, save Ireland. Tax cuts for the wealthy? Hogwash. I'm nowhere near wealthy and my taxes were cut drastically, allowing me the opportunity to save and invest in my kids' education. Universal healthcare? Take a good look at the Senate restaurant fiasco -- it will mirror what happens to your health care. Endless war? We don't set the timetable for when a war begins or ends -- our enemies do. But wait, I forgot, to liberals there are no enemies, unless he is employed by an oil company or pharmaceutical company.

God, help us. More government and less freedom is the wish of the neo-liberal. And he may just get his wish.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TheWordPimp
Read my column-From the Bottom Up on TheUrbanTwist
01:29 AM on 06/11/2008
So what you're saying is that so-called neo-liberals share an agenda with the outgoing neocons? The neocons have already handed us more government & less freedom. Have you looked around lately... noticed where we are as a nation? Your neocons have dumped this nation down a toilet. I'm not going to give them a chance to flush! I'll take my chances with the libs.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jacobomorales
10:02 AM on 06/10/2008
Jared
Bought your book and I love it. Keep up the good work. The public needs to be reminded of how good solutions need to be implemented. They need to get beyond the republican propaganda and short sentence solutions. They need to understand that the solutions are going to be complex and long term, ...
09:11 AM on 06/10/2008
How about a commitment for the US to reach France's 80% level of electricity generated from CO2 and air-pollution free nuclear energy; particularly, as over three quarters of the world's supply of uranium is found in the friendly countries of Canada, Australia, and the United States. That is a change that satisfies the demands of environmentalists while accepting that people want to maintain and improve their standards of living and need energy to do it. Do that and you can mandate that every car be electrical in 15 years.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
GhostOfSchlesinger
08:14 PM on 06/09/2008
Well, in terms of Social Darwinism, I and my family are on the verge of extinction. We've four jobs in the house. Ain't that cool? Four jobs! I've got three of them. I work about 80 hours a week and I bring in about 25 percent of our monthly nut. Ain't that awesome!


And George W. Bush is right. WE DO HAVE ACCESS TO MEDICAL CARE! The emergency room. For us and for our kids. Our medical bills right now are in excess of $100,000 dollars! Do I hate - I mean positively hate - the Bush Administration, the Republican Party and McSAME!!!


Will I vote - even consider voting for an idiot that wants me to "be a wise medical consumer" and build "solid vendor relationships with various providers, exercising the right to utilize my MEDICAL SAVINGS ACCOUNT (????!!!!!!????) however I choose in the this free market, free labor, free services for the wealthy" environment?


Noooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Will I support four more years of this crap? Not a prayer.


Gas is at $4 BUCKS a gallon today!


Vote Democrat. Vote Obama! Throw every Republican out of office! Every one!


Vote for the WE THE PEOPLE!


OBAMA 08!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BrighterStar
Let Freedom Ring
07:44 PM on 06/09/2008
To those who advocate for universal care I have one question: What ,in the entire history of this nation, would indicate that the federal government is capable of delivering quality healthcare to the American people?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Ranta
I don't need no ****** badges.
07:58 PM on 06/09/2008
It is called social security. It runs at a cost of 1/2%.
BrighterStar
Let Freedom Ring
08:40 PM on 06/09/2008
Social Security is really nothing more then taking money from people who earn it and giving it to people who don’t. When you are talking about a simple transfer of money ½% is not such a great rate. And you should also read about the massive problems many beneficiaries have when dealing with the bloated bureaucracy that accompanies any government program. When you think of delivering actual services on a mass scale the government has proven itself to be a failure. (Think Katrina)
Bladernr1001
Vote Libertarian
05:32 PM on 06/10/2008
I think you have that backwards. We get charged 15.2% of what we earn (including the employer portion) and it is projected that a person 45 years old or under will get a return on there money of about 1/2 to 1%.

Ranta, you got into the pyramid scheme much earlier and probably collected several times what you put in. I am projected to barely break even. I do way better than that on my own investements. If I had all the money I put into SS I would prbably be able to retire early.

it is the biggest ponzi scheme ever devised.
09:58 PM on 06/09/2008
Compulsory public school education. It has problems, but we are much better off now than in the early 1870s when it was first made compulsory. Those parents who want their children to go to private, charter, or home schools have the option but still continue to pay for the public school system. The move, however, toward vouchers is frightening, but in line with the author's memo, if the next president focuses on revamping the Department of Education and working toward federal standards that do not include suffocating teachers and students with a pillow of standardized testing, then we can begin to change direction from our current environment of anti-intellectualism.

I know this isn't perhaps the best analogy, but in terms of mandated action, it's close, and it's hopeful.
Bladernr1001
Vote Libertarian
05:33 PM on 06/10/2008
It has it problems?...It is almost non-fuctioning!

Standardized testing has not sunk public education. If you look at the chronology, standardized testing came along in a big way in RESPONSE to our screwed up school system. Go back to the 80's and 90's when our stupid administrators insituted such "winners" as whole language and whole math neither of which required students to get the right answer. How about the incredible rise in the power of teacher unions who squelch any attempt at even very modest reform. I went to HS in the 70's and I do not remember any teachers being in a union. If they were it was very benign in its duties.

The move towards vouchers is an attempt to break the monopoly that is our public education system. The school system operates with almost no accountability. Most private schools provide a much better education at better than half the cost. If you have a better solution to make the school bureacracy more accountable let me know.
06:33 PM on 06/09/2008
The rest of the world doesn't have either a second or thirteenth amendment. So when we do
pass this total control Real ID, I guess Doctors and nurses will have to lower their wages
to that of the Euro's--OR DON'T DRIVE/PRACTICE. i MEAN REALLY! What choice would they have?
Doctors over there make as much or less than some of the nurses over here.
06:12 PM on 06/09/2008
I read the first line and had to check my calander to make sure it was not April 1st.Very funny blog.do you have a show somewhere.let me know.thanks
05:44 PM on 06/09/2008
I want to hear only one thing from Barack Obama. That he is going to reduce the work week to 32 hours or less, and slash the military machine to pay for it.

Until then, he is just a part of business as usual.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
57basque
Mondragon Co-op or bust
01:09 AM on 06/10/2008
I love both of those ideas. We the people are going to have to tell whoever, what we want. But those 2 ideas will go a long way to helping everyone. 32 hour work week would mean more times Family have together. Along with keeping more people working, hopefully not for less.-yet getting the banks or land lords to cut our payments by 25% would take more than Christ showing up. Cutting the guns and bombs budget would do wonders all over... into solving things that we need to fix.
08:49 AM on 06/10/2008
Don't you think that during this time of high gas prices what needs to be done is more work from home instead of having to travel? Why do businesses keep their workers on the road when they could be working from home and saving fuel? Fuel that they might use in taking their vacations, or simply not being on the road so much?
10:12 AM on 06/10/2008
It would also slash inflation (which is generated whenever the government prints money to fund its budget); cut pollution, global warming, and reduce oil imports (to fuel commutes); cut the trade deficit (oil imports again).

This was supposed to be the "peace dividend we received when the Soviet bloc fell, instead, the machine kept on chugging.

It is a no-brainer for Democrats and Republican alike. Why it has so little support in either party is beyond me.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Quitcherbichin
If you are posting here, thank a veteran.
01:18 PM on 06/10/2008
Great idea Charley 2u. I think we ought to do that right away providing we also cut wages and benefits by 20%. After all if you work 20% less, you should be paid 20% less. Oh wait, I forgot. You are one of those folks that think business is evil and more government is good, one of the something for nothing bunch that is a major part of this countries problems right now.
04:53 PM on 06/09/2008
He's at it again, hitting Obama: http://www.greenfaucet.com/hanlons-pub/obama-it-s-the-small-stuff-that-will-really-hurt

I like the guy's economic comments, but wish he'd lay off our nominee... worried he might influence some people who listen to his market views.
photo
BillZBubb
Cogito ergo sum. Cogito.
04:36 PM on 06/09/2008
First, you are certainly counting your chickens a little early. There is a good chance McCain wins in November.

Second, Obama's "change we can believe in" doesn't include any really radical changes. His health care plan is a pathetic joke and nowhere near universal. As long as he keeps people like Goolsbee around, nothing you suggest has a chance.

The change brought about by an Obama administration will be incremental at best.
04:27 PM on 06/09/2008
Obama has to get bold on healthcare. The country has moved passed him. He can afford to push for universal health care and not have it be a liability. My fear for Obama is not that he will be too bold but too cautious and conservative. What people are listening to is the passion with which he says, "Change." The economy is crumbling quickly before our very eyes. They want bold action to save the state of the union that matches the soaring words. He will have to step up and deliver bold action to meet bold rhetoric. His opponent lost because in the beginning she missed the depth and breadth of public frustration. While she was busy triangulating the country was going to hell in a handbasket. When she finally got wind of how deeply hurting the electorate was it was too late to recover. I hope he is in tune with the emerging zeitgeist and doesn't repeat the mistakes of HRC.
08:54 AM on 06/10/2008
lol, someone I finally agree with. But the sad thing is nobama is not the one to do a thing about it.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CAPTAINSKIPPY
from the Far side of Frostbite Falls
03:29 PM on 06/09/2008
Two more BIG things: eliminate the deficit, and pay off the national debt! Or not.
05:07 PM on 06/09/2008
I am sorry to say Barack is not off to good start. I say this with a deep sense of disappointment. He is running a typical Democratic Party campaign rather than offering something really new.

First, the windfall profits tax is simply awful - what happens to the programs this tax supports once the windfall profits go away? How do they get funded then?

To really bring change to Washington, Barack is going to have to do better than this.

Second, the war is an economic catastrophe, in addition to being a human catastrophe - it must be ended. But didn't we do this once - in Vietnam? The machinery of war survived the end of Vietnam, and it is the cost of that machinery - as much as the present war - which is imposing such an economic cost to Americans, and will continue to do so long after the guns are silent in Iraq.

He has to go well beyond where he is now to satisfy me.

I say this with the knowledge that Lincoln had no intention of abolishing slavery when he entered the White House. Perhaps, in Obama's case, as well, events will lead him beyond his limited intentions.