It is at least a year or two too early to judge Barack Obama as an executive. There are a few indicators of process (trying to be bipartisan in form; hiring a lot of talent; deferring to Congressional leaders; flunking his claimed ethics standard), but meaningful results will take awhile. That said, he may have squandered the opportunity to lay out a clear vision, articulate the steps needed to achieve it, and rally the country to accept the behavior that will be necessary if we are to continue as the world's economic, military, and political leader. It was expected that we would see some of that in his innaugural address, but we are still waiting.
On the economy, what is the vision - not just a choice of short-term tactics, but the destination that he would take us to? What is the outcome of the debates between Larry Summers, Tim Gaithner, Paul Volker, Ben Bernanke, and the others? The hodgepodge of special interest-driven spending and tax cuts called a "Stimulus Plan" does not offer any guiding principles. Some things seem obvious:
- In the long run we need to reestablish a reasonable savings rate as individuals and as a country. It is actually good that banks have tightened their lending standards, that consumers have started saving some of their incomes, and that some people are asking why the Congressional Budget Office is projecting trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see. We need to move toward balanced federal, state, and local budgets. But there has to be a message of sacrifice and constraints which the Baby Boomer generation has not yet heard. If not, our grandchildren will.
- Private enterprise built our country's wealth, but we have moved toward extensive government participation in banking, housing, and the auto industry. What is the vision for the government's role once we get out of the current mess? Would he be more European?
- With apologies to my Republican friends, we need to share the wealth more evenly. This has implications for the tax code (why is there a cap on Social Security taxable income, for example?), norms (government mandates?) for executive compensation, and protections for lower income workers. The payback for union support may be a little more palatable if it is put in the context of a vision of the total workforce.
- We need to lead the global economy. Where is the president in the "Buy American" discussion? Or the strength of the dollar? Or immigration and outsourcing? Or China trade? President Bush was criticized for his purported Iraq unilateralism - but where is Obama on economic unilateralism?
On national security, there seems to be a drift to the left, but again without a clear vision.
- Does the commitment to close Guantanamo without a plan imply muddling through, or a willingness to relax our defensive posture?
- What is the vision for the Middle East? Agree or not, George Bush had a vision of democracy overcoming the conditions that lead to religious fanaticism. Will we move on from Iraq with the end game in sight to Afghanistan with no realistic plan? And will Palestine, Israel, Iran, and the others all be tactical, one-off decisions?
- And the general composition and use of the intelligence community and the military? Obama's campaign posture was to work toward the elimination of nuclear weapons and a big downshift on weapons research, and his followers on the left would like to restrict the tools of the intelligence community. Are we to rely more on international organizations and good will? Would the isolationists prevail? Can we continue to afford spending 3% of our Gross Domestic Product on defense? What's the vision?
There are lots of questions and he has only been in office for a couple of weeks, with a turbulent economy demanding priority attention. But he did campaign for two years and should be able to articulate the vision needed for leadership - Reagan's "Shining City on the Hill", Johnson's "Great Society", Kennedy's "New Frontier". If the community organizer is too interested in a group hug in which nobody has to give anything up, we are all doomed.
-----
YouTube I (snarky funny): This old campaign ad for Tom Daschle is particularly ironic. It is interesting that what brought him down was $140,000 in unpaid taxes, not the $5,000,000 he earned from a lobbying firm - much of it related to the healthcare industry. The loophole in Obama's anti-lobbyist stance? Daschle never registered as a lobbyist.
YouTube II (just plain funny) : And for some excellent humor on the future of the auto industry, compliments of Herb McClannan.
Bill Bowen - 2/6/09
Bill is right on here. Obama promised a new approach : Bipartisan inclusion in leadership and solutions to the nation's overwhelming problems. Then he begins it all by assigning the stimulus package design to the Congressional leaders who are, according to public polls, the most unpopular leaders of all time--far lower than George Bush. When will a President come into office and call the 6 leading Democrats and the 6 leading Republicans into a closed door session, hand them each a longneck, and say "Let's get this nation's problems solved together." Then, after these people have negotiated and compromised on a set of plans send them to Congress to get it funded and direct the Cabinet to implement them. Go to the people in a national address and explain exactly what the party leaders have agreed to and why.
Obama's idea that the people wanted change is correct: but the change is not a move to the left it is a move to cooperation and solutions to the nation's problems. Political war is what we now have once again, barely a month into the new presidency, and at a time we can least afford it. Most Americans have a disdain for the far left and the far right. They live in a world of everyday compromises and they don't understand why politicians can't compromise for the good of getting things done. Bill Clinton and John McCain were compromisers and both can get things done. Obama needs to rethink what change really means to the people or he will quickly see how fast they will change the structure of government once again. Just as they did when Republicans blew their chance to compromise trying to force their far right agenda on us. It's too bad Ross Perot gave up on creating a true middle of the road party so we could vote for it instead of playing this ping pong game between uncompromising parties.
Posted by: William McCormick | February 06, 2009 at 11:07 AM
Right on! Thanks for saying what I have been unable to put into words. We're worried. My business is down but fortunately my wife has kept her part time job. The congressional bill made me just plain angry. All I see ahead is high inflation and little help for the middle guy who has been saving what he can all along, paying taxes, taking care of the family.
Posted by: fly over state | February 06, 2009 at 10:57 AM