Now this is Presidential! I think all Presidents should do this on a regular basis before a television audience with the opposition in both houses of congress. What I think is remarkable is that President Obama, in all his speeches and Q&As, seems to be a rational, straightforward and believable person. He seems like the only one that gets it at times and that's why people in general like him and at the end of the day trust that he has the public interest at heart.
I completely agree with him that the congressional Republicans have painted themselves into a corner with the way they have portrayed him . . . they've made their base fear him. This has made it nearly impossible to work through any issues and get anything accomplished through bipartisan agreement. How can you make a deal with the devil when you've been telling your constituents he's evil and will eat their souls? Any agreement with him make Republicans politically vulnerable. I also agree with him that Republicans, although not in power, won't meet Democrats half-way on any issue. His example of the Recovery Act is a perfect example. Republicans would have supported 30-50% of the package but because they didn't agree with 80% of it there was no way they would support it. Here's the problem Republicans are not in the majority, they don't get 100% of their way and they don't set the agenda.
Lastly, where were all these wonderful ideas to reform healthcare when Republicans were in power? They complain now that the bill was a bad idea and Democrats won't listen to them . . . why didn't they fix healthcare with their brilliant ideas they presented today 6 years ago? They had their chance to reform healthcare and they decided to do nothing. Just sayin' . . .
On "Bill Moyers Journal" two legal professors talk about the recent Supreme Court decision . . . which you all know I think is one of the worst examples of activism from the bench. It is worth watching . . .
First let me start by saying that I think President Obama did about as well as he could have in his first State of the Union address. It is easy for most of us to forget what he was walking into when he took office a little over a year ago and I'm glad he reminded the nation. Not as a "feel sorry for me" reflection but as a "damn, we could be in far worse shape than we are" realization. Now is the real test: can he get congress to develop a real, bipartisan jobs bill. I think he can because both parties need a victory going into November and if Republicans stand in the way of job creation they are at risk of losing independents when they go to the polls.
For the first time since I've been watching the STOU, I didn't hear a boo, hiss or cat-call. Sure Republicans grumbled but they stood quite a few times as well. But what is most important to remember is that Obama wasn't speaking to Republicans or Democrats, he was speaking to independents. He extended the olive branch on key issues like energy, tax cuts and deficit reduction. He made a pretty good (yet unsubstanitated and speculative) case that the recovery act/stimulus bill, TARP and spending bill kept the economy from collapsing further (earlier in the day Bush Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson even said that without that help we probably would have seen 25 percent unemployment). I tend to believe that even though Obama didn't achieve everything he set out to do, his first year was pretty much a success because we are relatively economically stable and safe.
I liked that he took both parties to task on the way they do business, he's said this before in many speeches but tonight it really resonated. He demonized the Washington culture and how both parties approach policy. The mood of the country, most notably independents, is that collectively everyone is sick of solutions being scuttled by partisanship. He put the ball back into the Republican court on such things as healthcare reform (which might actually look something like it should have from the beginning), 21st century energy solutions, bank reform and consumer credit reform. He illustrated that partisianship may very well place us at a distinct disadvantage with China, Germany and India. He is dead-on right that the rest of the world is moving forward with infrastructure, green energy and job solutions while we wallow in our own quagmire of destructive politics. He also challenged Republicans to provide real solutions to the problems facing all Americans rather than just criticize the solutions presented to them. Tax cuts are not always the only answer.
But most important, he layed out shortterm and longterm job creation plans. Like I said, this will be a make-it, break-it issue for both parties this election year and whomever seems to be an obstacle will lose.
He highlighted healthcare reform and even made fun of himself in the process, but was lacking on what it will look like. I would have liked a better outline of his plans moving forward but he has a little time.
I do have to say is that the Republicans need to find someone dynamic to give the response. Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell looks like a Republican . . . almost like a robot. I want to see some personality from the Republicans and they've missed the last two times on these responses.
For all who feel the Democrats’ defeat in Massachusetts earlier this week was the beginning of the end of healthcare reform, I say that it actually was a good thing for the country.
Even though I think healthcare reform is more than necessary, I think the way the president and congress were going about doing it was arrogant and quite honestly stupid. Democrats got that “we-have-the-power” bug and thought (rightly-so) that their window for broad healthcare reform was quickly shutting (hello November 2010) so they decided to try and do everything in one big bill. THIS IS NEVER A GOOD IDEA. I voted for President Obama because I thought he got it. He seemed deliberate and thoughtful in his approaches and if he would have been true to my perception he would have provided a plan, not supported a congress-written bill, to improve healthcare. Good comprehensive plans take time to develop and implement, they can be amended as issues and challenges arise. They also allow you to fund them over time rather than give the American public sticker shock. The Mass decision allows congress (Dems and Reps) and the president to develop a 4, 8 and 12 year healthcare reform roadmap. Pushing through a bill that no one knows will work and few really understand is a bad idea.
In any case, what the Mass decision does do is get Obama and the congress focused on what this country needs: JOBS!!! This has been my major criticism (mentioned in a past post) of this administration (that and the half-hearted Afgan strategy – fish or cut bait – but that is for another post). This country has a legitimate need to improve its infrastructure and a deep recession is the best excuse to get government money to work for the people by providing jobs, need for materials, increased manufacturing and materials shipping. We can help every contractor, construction worker, cement company, construction equipment company, trucking company and construction related manufacturing company by just addressing a legitimate need that has been ignored for the better part of 40 years. That will jump-start the economy and a renewed need for professional services, get banks back on track to lend to small and medium businesses and address a terrible looming problem facing every corner of America.
My fear now is that addressing the infrastructure issue is a near impossibility as the first stimulus package cost us nearly $800 million addressing things like unemployment benefits, electronic medical records, updating government buildings with energy efficiency technologies and barely anything ($8 billion) for updating the country’s rail system. These things didn’t seem to create too many jobs in a short period of time and the jobs it will create are those which require a high degree of training or education. The highly trained and educated aren't the people out of work. We need to develop jobs that are easy to get, relatively easy to perform and have a ready made work force.
But it is my opinion the American appetite to spend more money on “Stimulus Round Two” or job creation is nearly absent. The only trick in the book is to reduce the payroll tax and incentivize companies to hire. This is a quick stop-gap and nothing more. The omnibus spending bill passed earlier this year had some infrastructure included but it was not nearly enough to address the country's growing infrastructure problem and stimulate wide-spread job creation. A comprehensive infrastructure jobs bill with a clear vision and identity is essential to a quick and sustained recovery.
I just hope Obama gets it. I hope he and this congress can get over their hubris and understand that good solutions draw from all interested parties and there are good ideas lurking on the right that they shoudl consider. Myopic ideologues could very well make Obama a one-term president.
Today's U.S. Supreme Court 5-4 decision to allow corporations unrestricted political campaign spending could very well be a date in which history lists as the day American democracy died. I hate to be that dramatic but it is the truth. American politics is already dramatically influenced by corporate money. Certain politicians (both parties) are beholden to their corporate bankrollers but there are limitations to how much they can spend toward their favorite candidate. Today that all changed. Corporations will own everything from your local school board to the presidency . . . no poltical position or policy decision in the United States will be safe. Corporate and soon union spending will determine who wins every single election and every law written and every appointed judge (including the U.S. Supreme Court). Frankly, this scares the hell out of me. The the past 100 years of campaign finance reform was to avoid this very issue.
Think of it this way. Any banking reforms this congress and president pass are not long for this world. It will take no more than two election cycles to repeal all reforms due to banks and the financial industry campaign spending. Any healthcare reforms will suffer the same fate. All housing and lending reforms will be non-existant. And you think private corporations and contractors have a strangle hold on foreign policy, just wait.
There is no question this helps the Republicans but I honestly don't care which party it helps or hurts - this decision goes far beyond party politics, this decision strikes at the heart of American idealism. Your vote should mean something. Public office is not a career, it is a public service. Candidates should represent what they think, not what their funders tell them to think. This decision eliminates what little idealism may have been present in the political process.
In anycase, although I think him a wingnut as bad as Sean Hannity, Keith Olbermann gives a good alarmist view on what this might mean to all of us, essentially killing freedom of speech in the name of protecting freedom of speech.
