Memo to Obama -- Be the Change
Mute all those cable TV pundits. The commentator who has the best grasp on what happened in Massachusetts this week is none other than President Barack Obama. It was a change election, he said Wednesday, just like his own.
In 2008, Obama won a solid majority by rolling up an eight-point margin with independents. His race, his youth, his political inexperience cast him as the antithesis of the despised "Washington insider." These non-aligned voters warmed especially to Obama's "post partisan" promise to put the nation's interests above those of political careerists, partisan hacks and rent-seeking interest groups.
On Tuesday, Massachusetts independents -- many of whom had voted for Obama -- backed little-known Republican Scott Brown, who improbably captured Ted Kennedy's old Senate seat by running an insurgent campaign against politics as usual in both Springfield and Washington.
And not just in Massachusetts. Independents also propelled GOP gubernatorial victories last fall in Virginia and New Jersey. According to an Allstate/National Journal poll, the president's approval rating among independents has fallen 17 points, to 44 percent, since April.
Evidently, America's swing voters are mad as hell and they're not going to take it anymore. What's got them so riled up?
Economic insecurity is a big part of the answer. Middle America is still reeling from the impact of double-digit unemployment, a decade of stagnant wages, falling house values and depleted savings and, yes, rising health care costs. Worse, as Obama acknowledged Wednesday, too many Americans believe that their government isn't doing enough to help them cope with adversity.
Instead, Washington has spent massively to bail out bankers, so effectively that they are awarding each other huge bonuses -- indirectly, at least -- on the public's dime. That's created a gnawing sense of unfairness among ordinary families who don't understand why buccaneering capitalists ought to be protected against the consequences of their own cupidity. It's also fed worries about a profligate, debt-ridden government that is extending its reach deeper into private decision-making.
Growing anxiety about "big government" has led some conservatives to crow that voters are rejecting liberalism. But there's little evidence that the public is moving to the right; in fact, Americans' ideological leanings are remarkably stable. What's more, Obama is not governing as a raging liberal.
In fact, he has drawn fire from his left for being too pragmatic. Liberals have castigated Obama for not nationalizing failing banks, for his puny stimulus plan (only $787 billion!), for his lukewarm support for the public option, and for escalating the war in Afghanistan.
Obama does need to make extra effort to build bipartisan support for his initiatives, if only to convince the country that Republican obstructionism, not liberal overreaching, is the main obstacle to progress.
The president needs to devise a strategy for bringing independents back into the progressive coalition. It should include these three steps:
Jobs and fiscal discipline
First, stress jobs and fiscal discipline. Some liberals are urging Obama to amp up attacks on bankers and health insurance companies in a bid to catch the wave of populist anger.
But this totally misreads what independents are looking for, which is an end to fruitless ideological combat in Washington and a relentless focus on spurring economic innovation and entrepreneurship. As the unemployment rate goes down, public anger will abate and Obama's standing will rise.
Political culture
Second, instead of embracing a faux populism that doesn't suit his temperament, Obama should take on the dysfunctional political culture of Washington. For starters, this means an end to letting Congress shape his major legislative initiatives. Obama needs to be much more forceful in wielding executive authority and the bully pulpit to defend the national interest against the parochial interests that dominate Congress.
The president should stand up to special interests, including those in his own party. He has missed several opportunities to veto swollen, earmark-laden appropriations bills; he shouldn't miss another.
Obama should also dust off his campaign promises to push for public financing of congressional campaigns. That's the only way to break the back of Washington's transactional culture, and diminish the power of monied interests and pressure groups to block progressive reforms.
Health care
Third, don't give up on health care. Independents are impatient for results. Letting lawmakers haggle for much of the past year to cobble together a health care reform bill was a tactical mistake. Public support for health care reform has fallen not because people are intrinsically against the idea -- after all, it was voters' top priority throughout the 2008 election -- but because they have little faith in Congress' ability to produce an effective and affordable solution to the problem.
Here, as elsewhere, President Obama needs to take charge -- and to remind Americans that he remains their best hope for change.
_________________
Will Marshall is the president and founder of the Progressive Policy Institute.
In 2008, Obama won a solid majority by rolling up an eight-point margin with independents. His race, his youth, his political inexperience cast him as the antithesis of the despised "Washington insider." These non-aligned voters warmed especially to Obama's "post partisan" promise to put the nation's interests above those of political careerists, partisan hacks and rent-seeking interest groups.
On Tuesday, Massachusetts independents -- many of whom had voted for Obama -- backed little-known Republican Scott Brown, who improbably captured Ted Kennedy's old Senate seat by running an insurgent campaign against politics as usual in both Springfield and Washington.
And not just in Massachusetts. Independents also propelled GOP gubernatorial victories last fall in Virginia and New Jersey. According to an Allstate/National Journal poll, the president's approval rating among independents has fallen 17 points, to 44 percent, since April.
Evidently, America's swing voters are mad as hell and they're not going to take it anymore. What's got them so riled up?
Economic insecurity is a big part of the answer. Middle America is still reeling from the impact of double-digit unemployment, a decade of stagnant wages, falling house values and depleted savings and, yes, rising health care costs. Worse, as Obama acknowledged Wednesday, too many Americans believe that their government isn't doing enough to help them cope with adversity.
Instead, Washington has spent massively to bail out bankers, so effectively that they are awarding each other huge bonuses -- indirectly, at least -- on the public's dime. That's created a gnawing sense of unfairness among ordinary families who don't understand why buccaneering capitalists ought to be protected against the consequences of their own cupidity. It's also fed worries about a profligate, debt-ridden government that is extending its reach deeper into private decision-making.
Growing anxiety about "big government" has led some conservatives to crow that voters are rejecting liberalism. But there's little evidence that the public is moving to the right; in fact, Americans' ideological leanings are remarkably stable. What's more, Obama is not governing as a raging liberal.
In fact, he has drawn fire from his left for being too pragmatic. Liberals have castigated Obama for not nationalizing failing banks, for his puny stimulus plan (only $787 billion!), for his lukewarm support for the public option, and for escalating the war in Afghanistan.
Obama does need to make extra effort to build bipartisan support for his initiatives, if only to convince the country that Republican obstructionism, not liberal overreaching, is the main obstacle to progress.
The president needs to devise a strategy for bringing independents back into the progressive coalition. It should include these three steps:
Jobs and fiscal discipline
First, stress jobs and fiscal discipline. Some liberals are urging Obama to amp up attacks on bankers and health insurance companies in a bid to catch the wave of populist anger.
But this totally misreads what independents are looking for, which is an end to fruitless ideological combat in Washington and a relentless focus on spurring economic innovation and entrepreneurship. As the unemployment rate goes down, public anger will abate and Obama's standing will rise.
Political culture
Second, instead of embracing a faux populism that doesn't suit his temperament, Obama should take on the dysfunctional political culture of Washington. For starters, this means an end to letting Congress shape his major legislative initiatives. Obama needs to be much more forceful in wielding executive authority and the bully pulpit to defend the national interest against the parochial interests that dominate Congress.
The president should stand up to special interests, including those in his own party. He has missed several opportunities to veto swollen, earmark-laden appropriations bills; he shouldn't miss another.
Obama should also dust off his campaign promises to push for public financing of congressional campaigns. That's the only way to break the back of Washington's transactional culture, and diminish the power of monied interests and pressure groups to block progressive reforms.
Health care
Third, don't give up on health care. Independents are impatient for results. Letting lawmakers haggle for much of the past year to cobble together a health care reform bill was a tactical mistake. Public support for health care reform has fallen not because people are intrinsically against the idea -- after all, it was voters' top priority throughout the 2008 election -- but because they have little faith in Congress' ability to produce an effective and affordable solution to the problem.
Here, as elsewhere, President Obama needs to take charge -- and to remind Americans that he remains their best hope for change.
_________________
Will Marshall is the president and founder of the Progressive Policy Institute.
No comments:
Post a Comment