The Post, Post-Partisan President

Barack Obama has made it very clear that he intends to govern as a bridge-builder. Ideology is a bad word in Obamaland. He will lead as a pragmatist, and also reach across the aisle to Republicans.

This stance has stimulated a passionate debate among progressives, on HuffingtonPost and elsewhere. For some, this is just the latest disappointing case of a candidate arousing the hopes of the center-left but governing from the center-right (viz. Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Gerhardt Schroeder). Hey, it's capitalism, what did you expect?

For others, this is neither politics as usual nor capitalism as usual, Nor is Obama the president as usual. And so it will not be opportunistic pragmatism as usual.

In the new normal, what is pragmatic is actually fairly left wing. If massive public spending, and re-regulation of Wall Street, and green energy, and universal health coverage can be characterized as mere pragmatism, bring it on. We can acknowledge later that we have moved the center to the left and shifted the prevailing ideology. Clever guy, this Obama.

But what about the post-partisan part? Here again, it may just be shrewd positioning. But if President-elect Obama actually believes that this is a bipartisan moment, he is in for a rude awakening.

The lame-duck Senate Republicans have just blocked the bill to provide temporary financing for the auto industry needed to give the new administration and Congress time to work with the automakers on a restructuring plan. Not much bipartisanship there. Indeed, it was George W. Bush, the least bipartisan president in decades, who came to the rescue of the industry and the Democrats by relying on emergency use of the bank bailout funds. Just imagine what Republicans will do in the next Congress.

If you have been watching or reading Republican pronouncements lately, just about nothing in the Obama program is likely to get the support of the Republican leadership. Bank re-regulation? The Employee Free Choice Act? Hundreds of billions for green energy? Universal health insurance? A trillion dollars of stimulus as the downpayment on a permanent increase in public investment?

The Republican story is that the best stimulus is more tax cuts, and that the money should be found by reducing the deficit. That leaves no room for more public spending, only for more spending-cuts. And despite the fact that deregulation caused the financial collapse, Republicans still insist that regulation did it--the evil Community Reinvestment Act (which in fact explicitly required that sound lending standards were not to be waived. Most subprime lenders were not even covered by CRA.)

Here is an easy prediction: When President Obama reaches that hand of bipartisanship across the aisle, he will find that the Republicans bite it.

Of course, it is smart politics to pick off Republicans for a progressive agenda wherever possible. Splitting the Republicans is much better than splitting the difference. By January, when Congress takes up the emergency stimulus bill, unemployment will be heading toward double digits, and state and local governments will be slashing public services. In that emergency climate, Obama may well get some Republicans to cross over and vote for a Democratic plan.

But that strategy is not being bipartisan. It is being an astute partisan. And there will be many other times when Obama will need to rally all of his Democrats to enact progressive legislation over the strenuous objection of most Republicans. This economic emergency and its political opportunity is no time to compromise for the sake of hollow unity. If Obama can win over a few Republicans for a progressive program, great. If he put can Republicans in the position of haplessly opposing popular and urgently needed legislation, so much the better.

By the end of his first year, either Obama will have put the economy on the path to recovery based on a progressive program that represents a radical ideological shift; if he achieves that, he will have done it with precious little Republican support. Alternatively, much of his program will have been blocked by Republican filibusters enabled by a few conservative Democratic allies.

Let's hope it's the former. And let's hope he has the audacity to call progressivism by its name. Either way, one thing Obama will not be is post-partisan.

Robert Kuttner's best selling book is "Obama's Challenge: America's Economic Crisis and the Power of a Transformative Presidency."

Comments

[moonflowerjewelry]

Is this a sad state of affairs or what?
We can expect republicans to block anything that will focus on making this country better off in the long term. a cleaner environment? bah, humbug! green jobs? bah humbug! re-regulate a corrupt banking system? bah, humbug!
I say, let us eat cake!

[MsYellowDog]

I have become convinced that this is nothing less than Class Warfare on the part of the Neocon Rethuglicans---it began with Reagonomics in the 80's and came to almost-full flower in the latter years of the Bush administration. Nothing but destroying the middle class and any chance of someone climbing out of poverty,will suit them. They do not recognize that there will always be people who are helpless and must be protected and assisted, they seem to say that such people wouldn't know what to do with prosperity,so they don't deserve it. I hate them all, they are the perfect personification of Orwell's "1984."

[research]

The Dems will probably have to nuke the filibuster immediately.

The GOP will continue to obstruct.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

The Democratic leadership won't even require real fillibusters.

The Democratic followers in the Senate won't even replace the Democratic leadership or otherwise take action to require actual fillibusters.

[research]

The Senate rules that the threat to filibuster is considered a filibuster.

Obama will force the Dems to nuke the Filibuster if the GOP continue to obstruct.

Obama may only need to threaten to do so, to get what he wants.

[DickTater]

Republicans don't really represent people, or even 10% of the people. They represent Corporatio­ns....an inhuman, almost immortal fiction...­.not a real person or group of persons.

Therefore, they do not have in them the pangs for humanity, the sorrow for suffering, nor the capacity to ever deviate one jot from the corporate agenda.

Expecting Republicans, the party of the Corporation and the Rich White Folks who temporarily are at the controls of the Corporations, to behave in the best interest of ANY human is ludicrous and dangerous. They do NOT represent anyone that YOU know. And however minimally they represent people...t­hey are hybrid Corporate Masters who cannot think or act like humans. Those corporate masters are tied to the same agenda as their corporatio­ns....they are not allowed to take humanity into account on any level....e­xcept on how to pry the money away from folks.

Anyone harboring any thoughts about Republicans seeing the light, or getting reasonable, should quickly shed those thoughts and get real.

[LinuxDude]

Sorry to let facts get in the way, but "Corporations" gave far more money to Democrats this year than Republicans.

When you see that Obama voted happily for the original bailout and is in favor of many more such financial giveaways, you can see why.

Corporations now own the Democrat Party.

Your deprecating comments are worthless since the party of Big Business isn't the Republicans any longer.

[Chillinout]

And I suppose you have a link to backup your claims?

[BillZBubb]

Facts, you claim to have the facts? The Republicans remain the party of big business. It was REPUBLICANS Bush and Paulson and Bernarke who initiated and pushed the bailouts, not Democrats.

The Republicans will fight to prevent any meaningful re-regulation. They even went so far as to block restricting CEO wages for companies getting bailout money.

Obama, like many other Senators, ignored the mindless mob and voted for financial rescue plans. Unlike the mob, Obama knows letting the financial system collapse is the worst possible scenario. We wouldn't be in this mess if the Republican party hadn't put us here.

[DickTater]

Yikes! You can't believe your own stuff, can you? SO in your world, the Corporations just abandoned the republican party. Just recently? And switched over to the Dems. Hmm.

Yes I know there is plenty of crap flying around in the Dem party. Corporations are doing there level best to ruin humanity there, too. Dems can be, and are, seduced and strong-armed and bought-up by corporations. But it is a struggle.

Republicans are willing plants, often sponsored in the first place by corporations, or come straight from a corporate venue to run for office.

My main gripe is with corporations and ANYONE who helps them. Republicans help them every step of the way, and I see no abatement in that. LinuxDude, you should be ashamed of yourself for carrying corporate water. Who pays you for your words?
DO you like republicans? Do you like corporations? If so, why?

[hjfraser2002]

Me thinks different.

[kasinca]

Republicans have done their best to destroy the government since Ronald Reagan. They had a good schtick and talked a good game. It is clear they have failed. Their plan does not work. The regulation was in place for a reason: Crooks will steal money where allowed!

It is to be expected that these people or troglodytes will never admit to their failures. They elected Reagan, Bush the senior, and W for God's sake! They went along with this illegal war. They protected the Bush Crime Family. They even allowed Jerry Falwell and James Dobson to control their party! We must go forward exposing their backward failures. They will never admit their wrongs but the American people have spoken in the past two elections. The GoP is a dying breed.

[fredfep]

One thing that has started to sour me is this group of Obama supporters who react to even small criticisms by labeling the critics as always against Obama. This is nuts. Not all supporters are naiva hero-worshippers.

I agree that nothing has started yet. I don't agree that neo-cons appointed can be controlled by one person. There isn't enough time in the day to personally oversee everything. But I can wait and see. Obama is pretty persuasive and if he tries using this talent, perhaps he can shame Republicans, or tame them. We shall see. I found that Clinton gave up on that very fast and began appeasing the right, bending over nearly backwards. And when they never relented, got far worse in fact, he kept compromising and giving in to their things

And they never lightened up.

So I wait to see if Obama has the balls, so to speak, or, perhaps, if he truly is a progressive, or just made believe to be elected. He certainly got my vote, and my early support. But I have no worshipped heroes anymore, I am too old for that silliness.

[hotstuff]

Obama will take it to the people, and with their voice behind his choice's the Republicans will listen or will hear us republicans who went obama tell them we won't return to the party!

[research]

"They" are a straw man.

Most Obama supporters seems realistic.

Just because they have an opinion about Orealy, Bush the GOP doesn't make the idealists.

If those aforementioned criminals criticize Obama, you may expect some personal venting as well.

Seems to me, Obama supporters are pretty hard on Obama too.

[Rebs420]

I thank you for saying what I could not eloquently write! I have been so worried about all these people who worship Obama like he is the second coming. I understand that after Bush almost anyone is like a second coming. However, when you put anyone on too high of a pedestal they are bound to fall and Obama is flying really high in a lot of minds and when he falls I hope that his supporters are there to help pick him up. Even he is aware of the arduous task ahead of him. He tries warning everyone that it will get worse before it gets better and that we are all going to have to sacrifice in some way. I hope people are really listening and understanding him.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

"One thing that has started to sour me is this group of Obama supporters who react to even small criticisms by ..."

Some, of course, are actually Repubicans pretending to be Obama supporters.

This is part of Limbaugh's "Operation Chaos"

[CenterOfMass]

"...perhap­s he can shame Republicans, or tame them. We shall see. I found that Clinton gave up on that very fast and began appeasing the right, bending over nearly backwards.­"

Yeah. One problem with Clinton (Bill) was that he started off by trying to dictate the lay of the land to Congress. Example:The Bill/Hillary healthcare initiative. His first State of the Union address was overbearing, in that environment. He thus made firm enemies of his non-supporters, and it got worse from then on.

Obama's first moves will be important, for sure.

[WhatsLeft]

Republicans will not grasp Obama's hand or lend a hand to any effort to revitalize the middle class. By blocking any or all of the Obama agenda the Repubs will be able to say that "they (the Dems) can't get anything done". The economy will worsen, they hope, people will become frustrated, they hope, and all so they can use the end result for the election in 2012.

Tom Delay ran for office to weaken EPA regulations that were costing his exterminating busisness too much money. He went into office for self benefit. I mention this because it is the typical Republican thought process: What do I get out of it? Nothing has changed.

[johnie2xs]

These Repuglicans are like "The Black Knight", in the Monty Python skit of the same name. We've lopped off both arms, and I suppose it will be necessary to lop off both legs, as well in '10 and '12. So be it.

[Gary50]

"Just imagine what Republicans will do in the next congress." It doesn't require imagination, just remembering what they have done for the last hundred years. They will vote against anything that helps the poor, middle class or the environment. They will vote for everything that helps the rich, the super rich and corporations (this is known as class warfare but only when Democrats are fighting for fairness). They will try to involve Obama's administration in hundreds of scandals, mostly completely invented and totally baseless. And of course they will blame Obama and the Democrats for everything that has gone wrong during the last eight years of Republican incompetence, misrule, theft, war mongering, law breaking and general debasement of our once great nation. They will claim that Obama and the Dems lost the Bush war(s) just when we were about to win (see Vietnam war). And the "liberal" media will back them 100 percent. There, no imagination needed!

[theplaintrutho1]

As I enjoyed your post, and understand all of what you are saying, just remember one thing. This is not a Republican thing, it's an us white people thing, Republican or Democratic.
Less then a hundred years ago Republicans were fighting for Black's rights.

http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/pcism/sad_history.htm


...Moving on, in answer to the burgeoning civil rights movement in the '50s, it was Democrat governors and Democrat-controlled state legislatures in the South that placed the Confederate battle flag on their state capitol flags. It's an issue that continues to inflame racial passions even today.

In 1957, Orval Faubus, the governor of Arkansas, called out his state's National Guard to prevent the integration of Central High School in Little Rock. In response, President Dwight D. Eisenhower sent U.S. troops to the city to escort nine frightened black teens into the school past riotous mobs inflamed by Faubus' defiance of a federal court order. Faubus was a Democrat. Eisenhower was a Republican.

On June 11, 1963, Alabama Gov. George Wallace stood in the doorway of the University of Alabama to block its integration. Wallace was a Democrat. Now, I grant you, John F. Kennedy was the Democrat president who federalized the Alabama National Guard and ordered its units to the university to force its doors open to black students..­.

[LeftCoastLarry]

All that does is illustrate what it really meant to be a Southern Democrat in the '50's. The South turned Republican when President Johnson pushed the civil rights act and has voted Republican ever since. Also, to equate the present Republican party and their policies with the fact that Lincoln was a Republican is a very superficial way to look at things. Indeed, all your talking points and conclusions regarding Republicans and Democrats are simplistic.

[Quinty]

Never heard of Nixon's "Southern strategy?"

[LeftisBetter]

In a Republican's mind there is their way or no way... I feel the same way as this article, it's going to be a tough time for anybody http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-kuttner/the-post-post-partisan-pr_b_150938.htmll#o do something with the obstructionists in the way

[grantlingel]

Obama will do whatever it is necessary to make this country right again.. and is it weird that when I type Obama he gets a red, squiggly line under his name.. why hasn't that been added to the word bank?
http://www.vagabondstory.com

[KSun]

I hope when Obama reaches that "hand of bipartisanship" across the aisle, that he's firmly gripping a tightly rolled-up newspaper in the other hand.

[LHoney]

Maybe a shoe...

[drkazmd65]

LOL,... much better, and more topical anology LHoney!

[drkazmd65]

Well put KSun,... a within-country version of Teddy Rosevelt's "Speak Softly, but Carry a Big Stick" philosophy.

If the Democrats can mostly hold together, and if a substantial chunck of the Republicans in purplish states can be made to realize that opposition to popular and needed reform and funding will mean fodder for their opponents in the next election,.­. at least some of the time they will be swayed.

Obama (or his proxies) just need to use the rolled up newspaper and some PR at appropriate and juducious times. The rest of them will get the idea and at least be willing to do some dealing.

[timberdoodle]

Don't under estimate the Obama intelligence factor. He will likely introduce bills with monies allocated to each state specifically ear marked for their respective infastructure making it very difficult for any senator to go against without leaving themselves open to damnation.

[fnygy]

Progressive, liberal, pragmatic blah blah blah.

"That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet..."

Obama won't be perfect. Good thing we don't need perfection - only progress. I'm looking forward to it.

[drkazmd65]

Perhaps the smartest, straightest to the point, comment I have read on Hufftpo since the election fnygy.

[Citizen54]

bipartisanship, Democratic definition: roll over and let the other side have whatever they want

bipartisanship, Republican definition: screw the country, we're not budging until we get exactly what we want for the 10% of the population that we represent

[Blain]

my point exactly, just look at most of the cabinet picks so far. BO supporters didn't vote for him so that he could turn around and let neocons continue to de.stroy the country.

[vjoseph]

Your premise is flawed but then again, what did I expect from a BO opponent?

[sbvpav]

we americans overwhelmingly voted for change - not the politics of divisive, partisan "don't get anything done." the gop, should they wish to win a national election again, should think how hard the wish to block the much needed solutions to the many complex and inter-connected challenges facing our country and future.

[hquain]

Obama will destroy the Republicans by enticing them to destroy themselves. They're easy that way.

[vjoseph]

LOL, like it

[harriscrl3]

Many havent seen Obama in action but its going to be fun to watch him come Janurary. Obama is brlliant and shrewd. Republicans arent going to stand a chance

Carol