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."
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Great post. It would be a formula for disaster to meet half way the people who have been wrong on everything. Let them shiver alone in the wilderness for a couple of decades, and perhaps they'll reexamine their ideology.
Barack is incredibly naive if he thinks that running to the right and filling his cabinet with conservatives will gain the respect and bipartisan cooperation of republicans. As we speak the RNC is already putting out ads linking Gov Blago to Obama to try to discredit him before he even swears in. Once Barack finds himself embroiled in a scandal (and he will because thats what repubs do) he will come running back to the progressives who got him elected in the first place. I want to be hopeful but I can already see it coming with this Blago scandal brewing. Thank Patrick Fitzgerald for that!
The one thing we have is time. Just wait for the dinosaurs to die off.
Obama can sit on his hands and things will improve. Bush seems to activly screw the middle class.
What a difference an obama administation will make.
.
Hello?
We cannot wait. The state of our economy constitutes an emergency. Our economy is deteriorating rapidly everyday.
Your post seems to have a bit of false bravado. Sitting on your hands will make them turn blue. Better to get them dirty trying to fix things. As far as the waiting for The Republicans to die off, you better get that notion out of your head. A few election cycles and we could see a new Newt or Reagan smiling at us from the newstand. Never underestimate these people. They are fierce and crafty.
People had better realize that obama NEVER intended to carry out his promises, even he understood that you cannot reduce the tax on 95% of the people while increasing spending. It will be fun watching the "media" try to redefine the center right as the new center left. The ultra left has been duped but cannot admit it.....
LOL...just another sore loser. BTW...its the tax increase on the 5% that I really want to see.
So tell us, what are you doing yourself to help America be a better place?
Non-partisanship, to Democrats, appears to be a one way street in which republicans agree with democrats.
If democrats want non-partisanship, they could agree to oppose homosexual marriage, government funded stem-cell research, and the United Nations.
Guess what? They won't.
Why not?
Because they are partisans and always will be.
The problem is thinking that partisanship is bad.
Isn't that just so special. Republicans have defined non-partisanship, or bipartisanship, or whatever, as getting just enough Blue Dog Democrats to go along with whatever idiotic nonsense they were pushing, and now you're accusing the Democrats of exactly the same thing. Cute.
You know what? I hope the Democrats govern exactly like that, only without the pretense of bipartisanship. It's just so unseemly. Besides, the people elected the Democrats for a reason; I just hope they wake up, smell the Maxwell House, and realize it.
So you agree with me that partisanship is not bad? Or you agree to support a bad thing (according to you) like partisanship?
LOL
Also, I am not a republican OR a democrat.
Try it, you may like it. It is more like REAL non-partisanship.
I think president Obama should do "fireside chats" every week and if he can't get the repubs to help the country, he needs to let the country know, in laymans terms, exactly what's going on here. Take names and kick butt. As for the auto bailout, the repubs may have killed that so Bushenstein could add this to his "accomplishments" (gag) while rewriting the history of the last 8 years.
We'll just have to wait and see but I think people underestimate Barack Obama and his power to persuade. Obama has the uncanny ability to sell Progressive policies as common sense policies and if he does that he will get republicans he of course will not get the Rush Limbaugh types and quite frankly who wants them but I believe he will persuade moderates. The trick is framing an issue in a way that they can't say No to and no one is a master at that than Obama.
Carol
Yet again, you are the voice of reason
Most on this post seem to forget that Obama went to the Governors meeting (unprecedented) and asked them for their infastructure projects. All the states are hurting (even those southern states with foreign auto makers). Their Senators and Representatives will be hardpressed to refuse the demands of their Governors (and constituents) for the stimulus money Obama is proposing. This was VERY SMART on Obama's part. You get the Governors on board and you stand a better chance with their Congresspersons. He'll lay it all out in the bill who gets what and then we'll see who can refuse. Pragmatic does not mean stupid on either side. Confrontation does not work - you have to handle things in a way that allows the other party to save face to accomplish your goal. I will be shocked to see the GOPers refuse money for their states - especially after it's all laid out on his website and (I'll bet) in the local newspapers. Let them say "nay" and watch their carreers go down in flames the next election cycle.
This is going to be a very interesting Presidency. I can hardly wait.
Exactly. Obama is too smart for Republicans they wont know what hit them. I forgot about the governor meeting but thats the perfect example of why republicans are out of their league with this guy.
Carol
Obama made promises he will never keep. They fiasco ahead he knew about last March and knew there would be no way to keep his promises. I hear he is two states away from rewriting the constitution. Then watch out, your freedoms are history. George Soros has been waiting for this day and his plan sucks.
He has already shown that Clinton, Bush, and now Obama are one in the same. Spend, war, and screw the American people.
All I want from the Federal government is to get out of my life. I do not need your rules and regulations that have ruined the housing market(community investment act), automobile industry(fines and rules for green crap), wallstreet disaster(subprime loans). What more can you ruin? Yet, you now want to fix it? Most employers including this one wants you fired for lousy management.
You know if a politician speaks saying he will help you, you better grab your shirt and run. After all, it is only about who holds the power. I believe in individual freedom or power.
And ignorance is bliss.
Get medical help now.
I love how you decide that Obama is a lousy president, before he even takes office. Being that far sighted must have been handy when your boy George tore the economy, the job market, the constitution, in half. I bet you were in the perfect spot to weather all those storms. NO? humph. Maybe you don't know as much as you think...a fish doesn't know it's wet.
Everything didn't start going to pot until the dems got the majority in the house and senate. Bush had very little to do with it but most voters are stupid when it comes to knowing how government works. Dems have gotten by with it because they know that voters are stupid and they could just blame Bush but now it is all in their court and they won't have anyone to blame but themselves although they may try to blame Mickey Mouse.
god help us all if republicans gain a majority in either house at any point during an obama administration.they will make newt gingrich look like susan collins.
That is why we need to make them look bad. The more they bicker and the more Obama makes sense, they will definitely lose
Get ready to ask for his help in the next election.
I never believed all that "bi-partisan" rhetoric. I voted for Obama despite it. I like what Barney Frank called it: "post-partisan depression." If the auto bailout vote is not a call to arms, I don't know what on earth would be.
You really need to read his book and understands what he means by post-partisanship. I do not have the time to explain to you.
The current political divide is pragmatists vs plutocrats. The country has always been center-left even the idiotic over 65 white guys, who have been seen protesting to "keep the government out of Medicare." Only the brilliance of Republicrook propaganda has befuddled voters over the last 30 years sufficiently to get them to vote for wealth transfer to the wealthy. Now that they are a despised minority party let the contemptible Repugs filibuster and do all they can to bring on the next Great Depression. Nobody is fooled anymore. They will go the way of the Whigs and the Know-nothings (which they most closely resemble). Bring on the New New Deal. Out with the scoundrels. RIP. From their ashes shall arise a true conservative party worthy of Buckley, Bob Taft, and Barry Goldwater.
Nicely said! However, I would just as soon not see any republicans in office for the next few decades!
Contrary to the rule of the Republican autocrats over the last 8 years the party in power needs a "loyal oppostion" to challenge its assumptions. For example, Obama must print money and spend it as fast as possible to head off a deflationary crash. At some point fiscal restraint must resume. A rational, responsible (fiscally prudent) conservative party could safely articulate that argument. The current Republicrooks are hopeless. All they see is a golden opportunity to bust the UAW even if it puts the entire country in the tank. Besides they have not stood for fiscal restraint since Eisenhower (who wasn't much of a Republican).
I certainly want enough Democrats in office to carry forward the progressive agenda (as articulated so well by Kuttner) but not enough to establish a one party hegemony. Many positions of the Democrats are problematic--and don't forget who brought us the Vietnam War. Unchecked power still corrupts. Ask Blago.
Hear, hear
So did we think that when Obama won the election that special interests rolled up their tents and went home?
Did we think all the defense contractors retired, that K-street was closed, that Rush and Bill and all the other right wing parrots retired?
Remember, although Bush has only a thirty percent approval rating, it also means that one in three Americans think that this baffoon is a pretty good President.
Enough of this country is still sufficiently ignorant to provide Fox news with an audience and allow the
Republican spin machine to pursue their hypocritical agenda with hardly a pause.
And believe me, they're just warming up.
don't you mean 3 in 10?
Not to mention... nearly 1/2 of the country voted for McCain/Palin.
It's so amazing to me... that all through the campaign... people complained about the ignorant, Fox news, religious right conservatives... but somehow... since Obama won... these people are smart enough to see through the repub tactics and will exercise common sense in supporting an Obama presidency. Not gonna happen.
It's even more funny... that people thought that w/ the Democrats winning... that the Republicans were going to just roll over and lick their wounds.... hahahahahahahaha... please !!! And then these people have the nerve to get angry when the Repubs act like Repubs.
Not to mention the "conservative" dems who would rather go along w/ the Republicans... than their own party... I guess that's real "bi-partisanship" in action.
We have a HUGE fight on our hands... one I'm afraid we are going to lose... because we underestimate the opposition and want to play nice w/ the opposition.
And by "opposition" I mean those who want America to work for the wealthy at the expense of the poor (and they are on BOTH sides of the aisle).
So you already abdicating before we even try?!!! That is rich and soooo typical of Democrats. Do you see Obama rolling over and take it?! See how he is teaching the media and the GOP by taking his time to release all the information. He is not being led, he is leading. Learn a thing or two from your next CIC, it would do you some good
The only solution is for American people to be more involved and vigilant in their government. We have the luxuries that other nations fantasize about and we mostly take them for granted. We have our creature comforts and they keep us quiet for a while, but what about the other luxuries we enjoy, like being able to influence our leaders because they work for us, the right to elect or not elect crooks and the power to oust them. This thing we are doing right now, blogging and commenting and criticizing freely without retaliation is something to behold in a world where people get threatened with jail for blogging against the government.
This is at the heart of our problem. Greed and selfishness have become the new religion in this country and the Republicans are the high priests. We can't make progress because it is a "I got mine, screw you" society. I point to Pres Bush's fight against restricting executive bonuses and golden parachutes in the financial bail out. He is protecting his base. The restiriction is weakened and only applies to firms that have toxic investments purchased by the bail out fund. Now the government is not buying those investments, it is buying equity in the firms. CEO's are makeing sure they get theirs. The bottom line it that buying the toxic securities may have been more affective than buying shares in the firms. Greed.
If the GOP is in the minority, and they know they would lose a vote, they threaten to filibuster. Let them!!! Let the one guy stand there for 3 weeks reading the phonebook in front of an empty chamber live on C-Span (turn the cameras around from time to time). Let the whole world see this pathetic display of childish obstinance. And make them do it every-single-time they threaten to. The reason it works today is because they don't actually have to do it. If they had to do it every freekin time, how many times do you think they would?
It's basic child psychology. If the kid cries and you cave, the kid has a useful weapon. Let the kid cry all he wants and it's gets old real quick. If senators want to act like children, treat them like children.
If the Democratic Party was united and true to Progressive principals, they would do just that.
The reason the Democrats try to compromise on the bailout is they are scared to death of the consequences to the economy...total collapse. They know that the Republicans will totally block any legislation that they don't like and the republicans don't care how much this hurts the American people. The Democrats know that Republicans put their own ideology first, no matter how warped, and will not back down and will let everything crash. So yes, it is a case of Solomon.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
