Election 2012 - Barack Obama

In the left corner of our political boxing ring we have the Democratic candidate for President in 2012: Barack Hussein Obama.  Mr. Obama is the son of a mixed-race marriage, raised by his middle-class single mother or her parents in diverse settings as his mother pursued her anthropological research.  He was a product of our public school systems who took full advantage of student loan opportunities and a Harvard Law education to become the first bi-racial President of the United States.  By the very fact of his election he signaled a milestone in the social and legal progress of America over his own 50 years.  Now he stands in assessment by the people of how well he has done with the opportunities given to him.

It seems that complaints against Mr. Obama center on three issues: 1) that he embodies a big government, if not socialist, agenda contrary to American individualism; 2) that he has not restored our economy or reduced the national debt; or 3) that he has failed to deliver on promises and expectations from his 2008 election.

1. Socialist: In reality, America is a far distance away from being, or becoming, a socialist state where “the means of production are owned and controlled by the state.”  Certainly we could all point to some areas of regulation or tax burdens we might like to reduce, but I am still free to change jobs, start my own business, spend my money pretty much as I choose, pretty much the same as in 2008.  No guns have been seized, no “death panels have pulled the plug on grandma.”  The only area where the government has significantly expanded its services and engagement has been with health care – the very area that has long been broken, eating up our economy, and immorally inaccessible to much of the population – using the very model created by Republican candidate Romney.  Considering that it was a Republican President and Congress that passed the No-Child-Left-Behind intrusion into our public schools, and the Patriot Act intrusion into our privacy, and the various limits on people’s right to live the life they choose, the yelling about “socialism and big government” against Obama rings quite hollow.  As do all the protests against the new financial regulations needed to protect us against yet another financial Great Recession.

The “socialist” charge is an easy way to whip up the emotions of those who already feel frustrated by government intrusion into our lives.  It has been used (with racial undertones) by corporate monopolistic business leaders for 100 years to discredit people who are opposed to their excessive economic control and ability to wield favored political power.  But the substance does not work here.  Not when the term comes from the very politicians who are themselves promoting intrusion and control over our lives.

2. Economy:  There is no question that the Bush economic collapse of 2008 completely reprioritized Obama’s intended political agenda.  Yet Obama managed to contain a consensus looming depression into a recession.  Unemployment maxed out at 10% in October 2009 – not a desirable level, but way better than the 25% experience of the 1930s Great Depression.  It has since been on a steady decline for three years, most recently standing at 7.8%, just three points above our typical 5%.  (The unemployment rate would be lower if Republican budget cuts and anti-stimulus votes had not fired thousands of federal and state government workers.)  Total employment in the private sector has been consistently growing for over three years; there are now over 500,000 net private sector jobs in place than when Obama took office.  The auto industry is alive and well, and millions of auto manufacturing and supply chain jobs were saved by Obama’s investment decision – an investment that is actually returning a profit to the U.S. Treasury.  And unlike Bush’s bailout gift to the financial industry, Obama extracted smart conditions for change in both management and labor, and added benefits to the public, from auto industry leaders.  The stock market was tanking as Obama came into office, losing almost one-half of its wealth to a Dow Jones Industrial Average low of $6,547.  That average has now climbed up to over $13,500, and most 401k retirement accounts have been restored.  The budget deficit has been steadily reduced each year, from $1,509B for FY 2009 to $1,100B for FY 2012.  All in all, not a bad track record for someone trying to bring the American economy back from the financial cliff.

Growth may be slow, but it is still growth; over 90% of Americans are in fact employed.  They say “it could have been worse” is a lousy campaign slogan.  But sometimes it is the exact truth.  Frankly the economy would be doing great if Washington would end its stalemate so that businesspeople would know the future rules of the game and be able to plan accordingly.

3. Disappointments:  As for disappointments from 2008, I have trouble understanding that charge against a President who has accomplished so much given so little to work with.  Americans always start out with great hope and enthusiasm for each new president; most of the time the reality falls short.  Ted Kennedy described his slain brother Robert as one who “dreamed things that never were, and asked Why Not?”  Yet German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck said in 1867 that “politics is the art of the possible.”  Hopeful vision in a leader is important to inspire effort and establish directions.  Yet you must also inevitably pick your battles carefully, make progress where you can, and seek to come out ahead of where you were.  The last four years have been a time of the near IM-possible.  From that basis, a lot of those 2008 campaign promises have gotten done.

Healthcare was Obama’s #1 priority, and in the end he got it done.  It was unnecessarily a too-big final package, and the decision to let Congress “work out the details” was a bad one because they made a mess of it.  But in a country this wealthy, bankruptcy, pain and death due to a lack of access to healthcare is inexcusable.  20 years from now, most people will wonder what all the loud protest was about, coming from people who already have health care and who will not be negatively affected by the changes.  Just as some politicians once protested Social Security and Medicare.

Immigration fairness has not been done due to the extreme “either/or” thinking in Congress.  Working in the middle, Obama has supported increased border patrols and deportation of illegal aliens.  But he also has supported some form of “path to citizenship” and a “Dream Act” for the children of illegal aliens that Republicans refuse to consider even as they refuse to round up the aliens they object to and send them home.  So Obama unilaterally found ways to provide some access and security for these children by executive order.

To ensure equality of rights, the “Don’t Ask / Don’t Tell” law prohibiting equal opportunity to serve in the military has been repealed; Obama has refused to enforce the “Domestic Marriage Act” prohibiting social benefits to domestic partners; and he has signed a bill strengthening “equal pay for equal work” requirements.  For some reason we still struggle with that “all men are created equal” thing.

Internationally and militarily, Obama has pulled that agenda off the usual Republican plate.  The Iraq war is over; two more years to go in Afghanistan to end President Bush’s forgotten “other war”; bin Laden is dead; al-Qaeda, while still dangerous, has been badly crippled; Libya is free of Gadaffi.  Guantanamo is still open due to Congress’ refusal to fund any alternate prison on American soil.  Our standing and partnerships with European leaders have been restored; the Middle East remains a 65-year old intractable problem spanning 12 Presidents for reasons too many to delineate here, even as former Bush (and now Romney) advisors trumpet for new arrogant military responses with Syria and Iran.  We do not seem to learn our lessons very well or easily.  But the Obama/Clinton foreign affairs team has learned and done well.

As far as disappointments, the ugly and paralyzing partisan Washington rancor remains unabated.  In trying to be the great bipartisan reconciler, Obama has been too slow to recognize the depth of the Republican commitment to achieving his defeat in 2012 by objecting to everything he proposed.  Obama has held out too long for compromises where there was never going to be any, and valuable time and credibility were lost.  A “my way or the highway” style of governing may be undesirable, but a leader has to know when to cut bait and fight for his/her goals with passion and force.  For all his great talent at delivering an inspiring set speech, he and his team have been remarkably bad communicators in explaining the day-to-day level of decisions, actions and results.  This has left Republicans free to run simplified (and generally inaccurate) bumper-sticker slogans, confusing the public discussion.  Given his lack of hands-on business experience, Obama has still not found a supportive voice for the businessperson, especially the small entrepreneurs who drive jobs and our economy; the balance we truly need between economic and social agendas is lacking.

Are there some specific disappointments I have from the last four years?  Yes.  Do I blame Obama for not delivering?  No.  Blame is too widespread.  Compromise and reconciliation are not 1-sided propositions.  One cannot lead a nation when one side refuses to march together, and instead uses our struggling economy as a mask for all kinds of side issues of social destruction.  The American people are notoriously short of memory and patience.  To properly assess Obama, we need to clearly remember where we started from four years ago, where we actually are now, and realistically measure our progress against the really deep hole we are still climbing out of.