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 article Robert!
You'll forever be a HERO for not backing down when Sean Hannity tried to bulldoze over you... claiming "there is no financial crisis"! Loved it!!!!!
http://www
Working with the Republican leadership in the Senate will be a waste of time. Bi-partisanship will come from reaching out to Republican Governers who actually have to do something or else lose their office.
Well said and I think that is where Obama was thinking all along
I trust that when PE Obama reaches across the aisle it will be with a mailed fist in a velvet glove that breaks a few teeth of the first dogs to snap at it. What is harder to understand is the failure to appreciate how we have arrived at the state we are in by those who paved our path here -- and I have many doubts that most, if any of it, was done with good intentions. There are times of peace and prosperity when conservatism might be a barely adequate substitute for astute governance, but the here and now is definitively not one of those times. To espouse the liturgy of tax and spending cuts -- a literally bankrupt strategy -- is to be a pure and simple obstructionist. Emphasis on the latter.
Bravo. I just love post that are eloquent and well written!!!
Well said
Bush ran as a "uniter not a divider" and ended up the most partisan, divisive president we ever had.
Not only that, but his policies were a disaster on all fronts.
Obama ran against the "failed policies of the past" and won convincingly. More than Bush ever did.
Obama owes it to the American people to follow through on his mandate and lead us in a new direction.
If the Republicans want to be obstructionists, so be it, but they must be called on it. Actually make them filibuster if that's what they insist on doing and let the American people see what they are doing to destroy this country.
I can already foresee Obama calling on the Republicans who act silly. One proof that Obama is intent on following through, is how he made his announcement for HUD. He didn't go through the media because he knew the media weren't going to let his message go through because of the Blago affair, so he went through Youtube. Quite astute, I might say
George W Bush reached across the isle most of the time, and all it got him was his hand bit off by the Democrats. The Democrats were mean and ruthless, and now that they are in power they expect the Republicans to just turn over and let the Dems do whatever they want.
I'm sorry, the mean old Democrats have sowed hate in the halls of Congress, and Republicans will fight on principle, just like they always have done.
On principle? Like wars based on lies, blindless de-regulation, Enron, and no-bid contracts that have sunk our economy? geez e
Wrong, those issues were pushed by the " moderate " centrist wing, which is mostly the same thing proposed by " pragmatic" Dems.
Dont feed the trolls...
little pockets of real principals?
photofarm, are you kidding Bush reached across the aisle!! Hey it was his way or the highway! The only instance I can recall of his cooperating with the Dems was the no child left behind act, and then he didn't fund it properly. Bush, the worst president in American history, how can anyone defend him seeing the current crisis we are in today? The repugnican congressmen who survived the 2008 election are mostly from the southern states and still in the throes of 19 century thinking and won't support a black president.
Are you serious???? Yeah... Bush reached across the aisle... patted the Dems on the head and they rolled over and gave him whatever he wanted.
I guess you are living in a parallel universe..
Well, he comes from the state that gave us the Great Pragmatist, himself, Lincoln. And I sincerely hope with all my heart that PE Obama proves to all and sundry that at last we've moved into centre-left territory as a nation and a people. But I despair of his hopes for bipartisan cooperation in Congress. For the Repubs, the loss of this election is a raw sore that they anticipate will take at most, 8 years to heal. I hope for a strong and decisive Democratic leadership to push through the agenda they hope to follow and achieve - on the economy, on universal health care, on climate matters and on the illegal war that the previous President deceptively began.
I think he is smart to realize that he has a battle at hand and he is tough enough to fight back. Lets stop this narrative that Obama is naive, HE IS NOT. The man is strong enough to handle it, the same way he did during his tenure at Harvard Law Review
During the first stages of the Great Depression the ruling Republicans did nothing to change the situation. Similarly, by fudging the figures they hid the existance of the current Recession for a year. The $350 billions distributed to the financial sector was a huge fraud.
Spouting the rhetoric that failed during the election, they serve to obstruct the measures that might slow the downward spiral. These obstructionists should be removed from office. With control of the FBI, the new Administration will have access to investigative files that cover the perfidy of high officials.
The Democrats have been out of power too long. They are accustomed to the prone position awaiting the Republican whip. The electorate is too savvy to accept the inaction of toadies.
Mr. Kuttner alludes to something similar in his recent book and how FDR fought them on that
I have faith that Obama is going to carry out a left agenda because it is what we need right now and there are not any good looking alternatives.
I agree with other posters, your inclusion on "This Week" with Arriana was a welcome relief from the liturgical chanting of free market monks. Hope we see more of you.
The key is active citizenship, if the citizenry is alert and pays attention to what's going on in government Obama will be able to implement his agenda. However, if we go back to being passive Republicans will once again rule the day. Good article.
This is VERY important. Active citizenship (ie, the Obama base) was the key to Obama's victory. Writing letters to your congressman or congresswoman is not enough, especially when they are both con's like here in Georgia. Our voices need to be heard by everyone in Congress, across state lines, telling Reid and Pelosi to get tougher, for example. Of course, this is particularly effective when they are up for re-election.
PE Obama is a very smart, shrewd, determined, and highly skilled politician. Maybe the best I've seen, and I'm 60. I would've loved to see JFK's do two terms. But alas it was not to be. The stakes are very high, and PE Obama knows it. Being the first Black president, and not accomplishing anything would leave a very hollow legacy. And he has assembled a cabinet that reflects his serious intent. Everything I've read about him and his career validates that he is genuinely bi-partisan and determined to find common ground, have no doubt that he is going to do what he feels he needs to do to change the direction of this nation. He's going to sincerely try to work with the GOP member who are serious about the good of the nation, but make no mistake, he is going to get what he wants if they don't cooperate. That's why he made sure he got a Democratic majority, and a mandate. The Republicans who underestimate him, and try to play the traditional political game, do so at their own, and their party's peril. This man is a high achiever who is obviously determined to get an A in being president.
I believe that if Obama runs into the deep partisan divide that has all but destroyed this country, he'll take it to the people. In much the way FDR had his fireside chats, President Obama will keep the citizentry informed of the doers and the defeators. Those who help and those who hinder.
Most Americans are tired, scared and sick of being lied to by an administration that has made this country a joke heard round the world.
Though I'm not fan of Reagan, could you imagine anyone throwing a shoe (a powerful insult in the Arab world) at him?
We need more than a progressive President, we need a progressive population that no longer just accepts what it's told, but demands action and proof.
I agree with your comments especially your conclusion. But in order to achieve that, you are going to have convinced the people who have been lied to for decades that government is the problem not the solution.
Robert you can help Obama by appearing more often on This Week. You and Arianna did a
good job of deconstructing David Brooks and George Will. At the very least your presence
will keep Cokie Roberts off. But I digress.
Obama needs to do what Reagan did with his first landslide. Reagan came in and used
his popularity to bend Democrats closer to a deal on tax cuts. Tip O'Neil was Speaker and
he resisted where he could given Reagan's popularity. Now the table are turned and in fact
Obama has it easier because his party controls both houses. So the time has come to use
the bull pulpit to scare Republicans for a change, to split them, to bend them closer toward
a new New Deal. Obama needs to study the FDR way of bringing America back anew.
FDR appointed the right people in the right positions. Time will tell how effective Obama's
choices are, how effective his use of the bully pulpit is. His charm, his intelligence could appeal
to Olympia Snow and other Republicans of there ilk. But those who seek to tear progress
for the middle class down need to be ostracized. The hard right should not be tolerated.
Another voice of reason
Hopefully, people are starting to wake up and realize that voting for Republicans is voting against their own interests (in most cases).
Also, lost in all of this is that Republicans aren't really fighting for less government, just more of THEIR government. They think balancing the budget will help, but they aren't willing to do that and would prefer to expand government to fit their plans.
This article, along with the one on the "Blue Dog" caucus, explains exactly why everyone that supports Obama's plans must be as vocal and activist about it as possible. I expected the Blue Dogs to rear their ugly heads, just not this soon and not this overtly. It looks as though the gauntlet has been thrown down early. Hopefully, the Obama team will be able to control all of the power factions lining up.
Obama was able to bridge the partisan divide at Harvard.
Many who worked on the law review and went into government in Washington say that the partisan divide there is nothing compared to Harvard's at the Law Review.
And he disappointed some liberals at first until they saw him doing good things.
I suspect this will be the case here.
I mentioned something similar in another post
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
