The full plate special
Is Obama trying to do too much?
The full plate special
Dick Polman, Inquirer National Political Columnist
When President Obama faces the press corps this evening, in his second prime-time news conference, he undoubtedly will be asked to address the charge (which has apparently crystallized into Beltway conventional wisdom) that his agenda is overly ambitious, that he has been piling too much on his plate at his own peril, that he is overreaching at a time when (to borrow a '92 Bill Clinton phrase) he should simply "focus like a laser beam" on fixing the economy.
Few would argue that he has been uncommonly busy during his first 63 days, what with passing the biggest spending/stimulus plan in history, working up a new budget that takes on everything from health care to energy reform to education reform, signing into law an expansion of children's health insurance and a measure helping women workers to seek equal pay, launching an incremental withdrawal from Iraq while shifting soldiers to Afghanistan, penning executive orders to close Guantanamo and expand stem cell research, and (finally) providing some crucial details on the public-private partnership program that (hopefully) will rescue the banks and calm everybody's jitters. And those are merely the highlights.
This speight of multi-tasking doesn't seem to be of great public concern. The new Gallup poll reports that 65 percent of Americans like the job he is doing; the latest CBS News poll puts the number at 64 percent; the latest CNN/Opinion Research, 64 percent; the latest Pew poll, 59 percent; the latest NPR poll, 59 percent; the latest Rasmussen, 56 percent. Pew, moreover, specifically asked people whether they think Obama is "addressing too many issues at once." Only 35 percent said yes; 56 percent said his focus was "about right."
Nevertheless, Obama tonight will probably be asked, directly or by implication, to defend his workload. The charge has gained urgency in many quarters precisely because of the steady economic slide, and particularly in the wake of the outcry over the AIG taxpayer-financed bonuses and the widely-shared perception (which I share) that the Obama teammates didn't exactly manage the episode very well. They did little to block the bonuses, they didn't anticipate the resultant public anger, and they wound up contradicting the spirit of Obama's populist promises to hold the financial industry "fully accountable" for their use of taxpayer dollars.
However, Wall Street's favorable response yesterday to the details of the administration's bank rescue plan - a Dow boost of nearly 500 points - may well give Obama some breathing room on the question of whether he's overloaded. If the major investment firms truly believe that the administration has charted an effective program for fixing the banks, and thus the financial system, it's conceivable that, over time, this confidence could favorably impact the broader economy. More immediately, in political terms, if the perception takes root that Obama and his heretofore maligned Treasury secretary have mapped a way forward, Obama will be more easily capable of selling the argument that he can effectively govern on multiple fronts.
It would not be surprise tonight if Obama simply repeats what he recently told reporters: "There are some who've argued that we can't do all these things at once and that we should instead just focus on Wall Street and banking. I think that would be a mistake. I think that extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures. So even as we're working on financial stabilization, regulating Wall Street, we're going to keep on pressing to get the investments that will ultimately lead to long-term economic growth." (The word investments is progressive-speak for spending.)
His overall argument, likely to be reinforced tonight, is that it's good policy to tackle health care and education and energy in the midst of an economic crisis, because solving those problems will all contribute to the building of a sound economy 10 years out. (There's also a political component, of course. Any president with 60-plus approval during his first year would be nuts to forego the chance of leveraging it for maximum effect.)
And it's also worth considering what skeptical Obama-watchers would be saying today if the president was laser-beaming on the economy to the exclusion of everything else. Instead of accusing Obama of doing too much, they would be complaining that he was doing too little. They'd be calling him a do-nothing president. They'd complain that he was dragging his feet on the nation's most pressing problems, and flagrantly betraying the activist "change" agenda that he as a candidate promised to pursue. Indeed, the New York Times editorial page this morning faults Obama for not doing enough on immigration reform, calling the issue "a civil rights crisis (that) cannot be left to fester." As Obama told Jay Leno last week, the hothouse atmosphere in politico-world is "a little bit like American Idol, except everybody is Simon Cowell. Everybody's got an opinion."
On the other hand, current concerns about Obama's alleged overreaching could flare anew down the road if the bank rescue plan fails to get traction. Yesterday was a good start; the Dow jumped by 6.8 percent. But it's worth remembering that, last November, on the day Tim Geithner's name was leaked for the Treasury post, the market rejoiced at the news and the Dow jumped 6.5 percent...and we know how well that turned out.
-------
Republican quasi-maverick Arlen Specter announced today on the Senate floor that he will join his party brethren this year and block any final vote on the Employe Free Choice Act, the hot-button labor reform bill that would make it easier for workers to unionize. Although he gave himself some wiggle room (he might "reconsider" his stance in the future, "when the economy returns to normalcy"), his announcement tells us a couple things:
First, this probably means that this ambitious reform measure (organized labor's top priority) is dead in 2009. Even assuming that the Senate Democrats had stuck together as a group to thwart the GOP, presumably with the help of a newly-seated Al Franken, their tally would've been 59 votes - one short of the number necessary to stop a Republican filibuster. Specter would've been the pivotal 60th vote. No other Republican is expected to fill his shoes, given the fact that, two years ago, he was the only Republican to side with the Democrats when the labor reform measure first surfaced.
Second, with his announcement today, Specter has basically signaled that he will take on all comers in the 2010 Pennsylvania Senate race. By siding with the party's conservative electorate on labor reform, he clearly thinks he can prevail in a GOP primary rematch, thwarting a new challenge on his right flank from Pat Toomey. And if he wins that contest, he clearly thinks that his statewide name ID and sizeable war chest will be enough to defeat any newbie Democratic challenger - even if the labor unions, once friendly to him, but now ticked off about his labor reform flip-flop - decide to pour all their money and resources into the Democratic effort.
Any way you look at it, the guy is a gamer.
Funny how when the liberals (including Polman) criticized and insulted Bush it was the conservatives who could not take the heat. Now that they have their guy in the White House and conservatives are prone to criticize the liberal champion, the comments are mean spirited and derisive. I thought liberals were open minded and wanted to debate issues. I thought liberals were for free speech and voicing opinions. Criticize Bush, call him stupid, call him a murderer, talk about the legitimacy of Fahrenheit 911, refer to him as the worse president in history...all good clean free speech from liberals. However, criticize Obama and you are mean spirited. Nice tolerance from our liberal brethren.— tom - wilmington, de- hey Talvenada....any comment about how Obama and his admin also believe some of the terrorists at GITMO also need to remain incarcerated without charges for a long while. To quote the news source..."Obama abandoned former President George W. Bush's argument that the president's status as commander-in-chief of the military entitles him to imprison detainees as "enemy combatants." Instead, Obama defends indefinite detention under the international laws of war, and the use-of-force authorization (PL 107-40) Cogress passed in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks." Note the word "indefinite".— tom - wilmington, de
- TOM: Excellent point! I'm watching it, like I watched #96 for Cheney; and I need to hear a reason, to have more info, or to be keep in the dark for too long. I'm also watching the rendition situation, and 5 Bush-Cheney events also. If I get The Bush-Cheney line of they are all the worst of the worst, I ain't buying it from anybody, not even Jesus. Right now, it could be a 1-to-10-detainees situation, but not the 25,000 at AG in Iraq. Remember, the tent city in the compound of that jail. If these guys are all bin Laden, Jrs., I want to see some kind of info on the hundreds of them, to see trials of some kind, instead of a whole lot of nothing.— Talvenada
- Dick - I think you have things reversed: The word 'spending' is conservative-speak for 'investments.'— Dodge
- Djoko Pritza, talk about a childish attitude... 'go pick up your ball and go home'! Where's your sense of humor... believe me, there were lots of time I cringed when President Bush would speak and I would LAUGH about it. Like my parents used to say... when you point the finger at someone, 4 fingers are pointed directly back to you! You're exhibiting a total lack of accountability... the PRESS... again, the PRESS was getting all over Obama last night for his spending... and people here are 'mean'? You're getting way too sensitive here.— JGD84
- All GOP and Conservatives should pay attention to the whining by liberals on this board... this is THE PROBLEM with Bi-partisanship. Liberals want CONSERVATIVES to 'compromise'... which a person or political party should NEVER DO if it compromises your principles. Now the 'going is getting tough'... even the press can't lay down forever... the evidence is mounting against Obama and the Democrats. YEARS of making jokes about Conservatives being stupid, dumb, racist, homophobic, ect., are getting blown away with the inept, incompetent actions of the 'The One' who appears quite normal without a TelePrompTer or notes in his hand just after a couple months! This is likely to get much better... who wants to make a bet, the SNL, Jon Stewart, David Letterman and Jay Leno have a LOT less to say about "The One" as the economy continues to tank and he spends our children and grandchildren into oblivion............ crickets... thought so!— JGD84
- It would serve a great deal of you well, not to mention the city/state/nation, if you would turn off Fox News and Rush Limbaugh and read a book published by someone other than Regnery Press.— BigDaddy3150
- JGD84: do you not wee the problem with what you, swmike et. all are continually saying? The "we should compromise, so long as I NEVER have to give up anything" doesn't work. Don't you realize that the other side has principles too? Do you know how arrogant some of you sound? You can't conceive that a) many (even a majority) don't share your principles, b) even a majority can be WRONG, and c) with many points of principle there is no "right" ot "wrong". You may feel that the smallest possible goverment is best. Others may disagree. There is no "right" answer. Compromise necessitates BOTH sides giving in on their principles - why would you even bother to have a position on an issue if it wasn't driven by a principle? ... As to the "evidence is mounting against Obama and the Democrats", what does that mean? Listen, I disagree with Obama on many issues (like spending) and didn't vote for him, but give the guy a chance to actually do something. I'm sorry, but it'll take years to clean up the messes that GW left. You can't hand someeone a shovel, send him into the elephant house and say "we haven't cleaned up this s**t for eight years. I'll stop by after lunch and see how you're doing".— still_independent
- The one positive I took away from last night is that Pres. Obama sounded more like a capitalist than he has previously to me. I've had concerns with the talk of him being a closet socilaist and some of the statements he's made previously. I still wish he wouldn't rely on government so much for solutions. But at least he gave market based solutions to some of the questions that were posed to him. Such as when a reporter asked what he would say to the kids living in tent cities, he could have said he would create a new government program to help them, I applaud that he instead said he would do his best to make it possible for the kids parents to have jobs.— Phillysub
- Thanks to Jonathan Krohn, I've discoverd I'm a Conservative even though I haven't read his book. Let's review his definition. "A Conservative is someone who believes in: 1. Respect for the Constitution 2. Respect for Life 3. Less Government 4. Personal Responsibility" Ok, that makes me a Conservative then. But speaking of compromise, how does GWB stack up? #1 - Spying on US citizen without due process. #2 - Terry Schiavo & discarded empbryos, yes, but Texan criminals and Iraqi citizens, NO! #3 - I think we all know how that one turned out. Something about the largest increase in government EVER. #4 - OK, I'm showing my Liberal roots because I'm running out of facts. In my opinion the next time GWB takes personal responsiblity for the wretched state of the economy, lack of bin Laden's capture or boondoggle in Iraq will be the first despite his claim of being the decider. So, the Republicans who support the ideology of 2000-2008 have ALREADY COMPROMISED THEIR PRINCIPLES. Get real. Oops. Sorry. That "Get real" comment was a little mean-spirited of me. I suppose I'm getting the hang of Conservatism.— Phrossty
- Posted by ark 10:59 PM, 03/24/2009 "... I'm sick of [Obama] already." - I'm just wondering, ark. When were you tolerant of him?— Phrossty
- Posted by ModerateMike 10:34 PM, 03/24/2009 "... Most of the conservative posts are supported with facts and expressed in a thoughtful manner." - A few of the conservative posts do this, but not most. My experience is quite different from yours. Perhaps I'm lamenting the loss of the poster I considered the most reasoned, liberal, but the right side posters rarely use facts nor are they thoughtful. Tom of Wilm. does, so does Xi, but I don't see evidence of an ability to view an issue from the other side or admit the possibilty of fallibility from the right side, save NEPhilly. The biggest problem I have with your assertion is the use of the term "most." Maybe it's because CD75 & swedesboromike post the most frequently and tend to demonstrate an aversion to reality unmatched by the left. I'd wager swedesboromike still doesn't believe banks & bankers were/are racist in their lending practices because it doesn't make business sense. Ironically, he's right. It doesn't make business sense. But that doesn't mean it isn't true, just nonsensical. I'd also wager he didn't read the paper I cited in yesterday's blog. I could be totally wrong, but I don't believe he has the intellectual curiosity to pursue viewing an issue differently than he already does. [Mean-spirited sarcasm alert.] Demonstrating same would invalidate one's membership to the dittohead club.— Phrossty
- Thanks, Phrossty! It does seem most of the liberal bloggers have left this site from the time I started, a little before the last election. It seems it is easier/more fun to be the party out of power & not be defending actual policy! I noticed the shift as soon as the election was over and more so as soon as Pres. Obama was inaugurated. I would almost get mad defending GWB while he was in power, but as soon as he was gone it felt like a weight was lifted off those of us that would defend him:) I said it while GWB was Pres. and Sen. Obama was running/campaigning for 2 years, it is easy to lob rhetorical bombs and have all the answers from the sidelines/campaign trail/minority party status and much harder to actually lead the country!— NEPhilly
- You're welcome, NEPhilly. It's always easier to criticize, than perform. That's why the tired cliché is "everybody's a critic" and not "everybody's a performer!" :)— Phrossty
- @Phrossty...You arguments are accurate, but disingenuous. Because you only hold the right side accountable for blind ideology, you show yourself to be the very one-sided, mean-spirited basher that you accuse other poster of being (even if you put your "alert" out before doing so). The shame of it is that, at least from your writings, it looks like you have the intellect, but not the will, to achieve intellectual honesty.— puckdad77
Cited by the Columbia Journalism Review as one of the nation's top political reporters, and lauded by the ABC News political website as "one of the finest political journalists of his generation," Dick Polman is a national political columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer. He is on the full-time faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, as "writer in residence." Dick has been a frequent guest on C-Span, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and the BBC. He covered the 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 presidential campaigns.
ARCHIVES
All commentaries posted before April 18, 2008, can be accessed at www.dickpolman.blogspot.com.
- American Spectator
- David Limbaugh
- Free Republic
- Glenn Reynolds
- Hugh Hewitt
- Human Events
- John Hawkins
- Matt Lewis
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Opinion Journal
- Power Line
- Red State
- The Brody File
- The Daily Caller
- Town Hall
- Weekly Standard
- Center for American Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- Daily Kos
- David Corn
- Huffington Post
- Media Matters
- Mojoblog (Mother Jones)
- Open Left
- Political Animal
- Salon's War Room
- Talking Points Memo
- Tapped
- The Democratic Strategist
- The Grey Matter
- Unclaimed Territory
- Andrew Sullivan
- Attytood
- Chi Tribune's The Swamp
- CJR's Campaign Desk
- CNN's Political Ticker
- CQ Politics
- FactCheck.org
- Gail Collins
- Howard Kurtz
- Mickey Kaus
- NBC's First Read
- Obit
- Political Wire
- Politico
- Politics Daily
- Pollster.com
- Real Clear Politics
- The Atlantic Wire
- The Fix
- The Moderate Voice
- The Plank
- USA Today On Politics
- Wonkette
