Transition Topic VI: Nixon to China, Reagan to Russia, Obama to...

Presidents have historically made their greatest marks and most lasting impacts when surprising the public with actions that defy the expectations of narrow ideology. Given the historic nature of Obama's election, his incredible popularity and majority mandate, Obama has an opportunity to do the same, and to change the course of history. Let's see how.

We all know the classic example of Nixon going to China. In the context of the Cold War in the 1970s, a Democratic president simply could not have initiated dialogue with Mao Zedong without being accused of being soft on Communism. Republicans would have skewered that president alive with cries of selling out, naïveté and perhaps treason. But such accusations would ring hollow when levied against Nixon, who built his career as an enemy of Communism, starting with his slime campaign against Helen Gahagan Douglas. The same social dynamics of "reverse credibility" worked in favor of Reagan when he engaged Gorbachev during the transitional periods of perestroika and glasnost.

Obama has the stature built on the people's good will to go where no Democrat has gone before. With his liberal credentials unquestioned, Obama can do something that no Republican could accomplish without being accused of social treason. Obama can redefine the role of a limited government in a society of expanding expectations of personal responsibility. We could be entering the Obama era in which the executive branch is reduced to an efficient organization tackling only those issues in which the government has a true comparative advantage, leaving the rest to individual states or to a properly-regulated private sector where appropriate. This would be a time when citizens expect less from the government and more from themselves. Obama can explore the outer limits of small government solutions like no conservative ever could.

This idea might seem the height of lunacy in the face of two wars, the Wall Street bailout, government handouts to Detroit, ballooning deficits, a $10 trillion debt and a crumbling health care system. But this time of crises is exactly when we have an opportunity, and obligation, to look for a new path so that the next generation can avoid the calamities we now face. Clearly what we are doing now under Republican leadership is not working. Doing more of the same and expecting a different outcome is a form of insanity.

Only a popular Democrat can reign in a government out of control, just as only Nixon could talk to Mao. Our time has come.

We must, first, once and for all reject the ridiculous myth that Republicans are the party of small government and fiscal responsibility. Indisputable facts prove otherwise. Ronald Reagan, the icon of the right, proposed the largest tax increase in U.S. history, following the catastrophic failure of his tax cuts. He oversaw the most bloated growth of the federal government. Reagan created, with his proposed budgets (not that of Democratic Congress), the largest debts and deficits in history at that time. It took a Democrat, over the hard-fought objections of a Republican Congress, to balance the budget, reduce the debt, decrease the size of the federal workforce, reform welfare, and usher in an eight year period of non-inflationary growth and prosperity. Then we have Bush, a Republican who epitomizes financial mismanagement. He mushroomed our debt to $10 trillion and exploded our deficits in an orgy of prolifigate spending with no off-setting revenue. By fighting two wars with no way to pay for the efforts, Bush has effectively raised our taxes to record levels; we just have not yet gotten the invoice in the mail. The money has to come from somewhere. That would be us. Now we have to cut the checks. Have no doubt that Bush instituted the biggest tax increase in our nation's history. Bush is like an identity thief who has gone wild with a stolen credit card. He has lived high on the hog without ever paying a cent for his excessive lifestyle and he is now handing us the bill as he drives away in his new car, with a big screen TV in the trunk. We are that guy in his rear view mirror, standing forlornly in the street, with ruined credit and a foreclosure notice on the door.

The facts speak clearly. Republicans have proven themselves to be fiscally irresponsible. This simply cannot be disputed. This is a fact, an undeniable, verifiable, indisputable fact. The Republicans, not Democrats, have raised taxes to record levels, expanded the federal payroll, created record debts and tapped out the public credit card with unprecedented deficits. Stop, stop, stop, stop this outrageous lie that Democrats are the party of tax and spend big government. Forever silence the ridiculous idea that Republicans are the "daddy" party imposing discipline and Democrats the "mommy" party devoted to pampering. Since World War II, only the Democrats have proven to be effective fiscal leaders. That is a fact. As Bill Maher might say in his "New Rules" segment: stop borrowing from your grandkids while pretending to be fiscally conservative.

Bill Clinton, not Ronald Reagan, was the leader who declared that the "era of big government is over." Obama can now take that to the next level. Every American would agree that our government has a proper role in protecting our national security. While not universal, most Americans believe federal funds should also support basic research and development, space exploration, and efforts to protect the environment within our borders and internationally. Most Americans believe that our health care system is broken, and that the federal government will have some role to play in creating a viable solution. A majority of Americans now clearly understand that the government must better regulate commerce and provide more effective oversight to protect our financial system from fraud and abuse.

Obama can focus on these issues that only the federal government can address. He can approach all problems from the perspective that smaller government is better than bigger. He can emphasize from his bully pulpit the importance of personal responsibility. Once past the economic crisis that he inherited from an out-of-control Republican, Obama can reinstitute a pay-as-you-go philosophy to reintroduce fiscal sanity to Washington.

Republican failures have led to the worst big-government interventions of all to save Wall Street. Once Obama cleans up this Republican mess, he can build on the Clinton legacy and lead us to a new era of prudent government.

We need a government as small as possible but as big as necessary. Obama can do that.

Comments

[ElBruce]

Don't forget no smaller than necessary. Republicans always seem to want to push it to zero.

What I'd like to see is a legislative system that whenever it creates a new corrective program, also contains goals, measuring systems, a timetable for reaching those goals and an oversight mechanism. As goals become reached, the program would automatically scale back to another, smaller "phase" and hopefully phase itself out over time.

As it is, every time government creates a program to correct a problem in the public interest, it creates a new, permanent institution. Over time, the problem itself might diminish or change, but the institution remains in place. Thus, government can only grow and never shrink. Also, the problems never get solved.

[Jeff Schweitzer - Huffpost Blogger]

Ronald Reagan got elected to government office on the contradictory premise that government was the problem not the solution -- tyou know, the very government to which he hoped to be elected leader. It did not make sense then, but makes even less now. Republicans can no longer espouse the view that government is the problem when turning to government to solve the financial crises they caused by having too little governmental oversight. Reaganomics and the Republican philosophy is dead.

[DaVinci42]

He doesn't need to got back to the OLD debate of small vs large GOV. What he needs to do is emphasize efficiency & effectiveness! The pubic WANTS the government to take on more responsibility for the huge problems in this country. Basically I agree with the subtext of your article, but I think you aren't framing it properly.

[Jeff Schweitzer - Huffpost Blogger]

I had hoped to capture that sentiment in the last sentence of the blog.

[DaVinci42]

You did. It was clear to ME what you wanted for the future.. I just had an opinion that the argument could have been framed differently so as to provide further logical support to your concluding sentence. The Republicans have duped the American people & the Democratic Party into believing in these false dichotomies (i.e. Big v Small Gov).