President Obama delivered the annual State of the Union Address on Tuesday in Washington.(Photo: Jack Gruber, USA TODAY)
Story Highlights
- Contrast between speeches reflects a political journey from aspirational to achievable.
- Lack of progress in 2013 proposals has dented Obama's standing
- In this year's speech, Obama chose to take a longer-term %u2014 and smaller-bore %u2014 view
WASHINGTON — Same president. Same audience. Same pomp and circumstance.
Different era.
The contrast between President Obama's State of the Union Address a year ago and the one he delivered Tuesday night is the difference between soaring ambitions — understandable for someone who had just decisively won a second term in the White House — and downsized dreams. It reflects a political journey from the aspirational to the achievable.
This time, the president announced a pledge by some top corporate CEOs not to discriminate against job seekers who have been out of work for a long time and unveiled an executive order raising the minimum wage for new federal contract workers. "Give America a raise," he said, urging Congress to raise the base wage for everyone.
He called reducing economic inequality and restoring upward mobility "the defining project of our generation." He repeated the word "opportunity" a dozen times. He spoke energetically and more quickly than he typically does in big speeches.
FULL TEXT: Obama's 2014 State of the Union address
MORE: State of the Union reality check
But on that same platform in 2013, his proposals were more sweeping and his threat of political leverage more muscular. "Now is the time to do it; now is the time to get it done," he said then of overhauling immigration laws. On offering quality preschool to every child in America: "That's something we should be able to do." On raising the minimum wage: "We should be able to get that done." On simplifying the tax code: "We can get this done."
But none of those things has gotten done, a fact that has dented Obama's standing as a strong leader and a competent manager. The botched rollout of the HealthCare.gov website in October and the simple political facts of life for lame-duck presidents haven't helped, either.
His job-approval rating sagged to 43% in the USA TODAY/Pew Research Center Poll this month, down 9 percentage points from this time last year and lower than it has been for any of his previous State of the Union addresses.
His ability to get big things through Congress is demonstrably limited, and he's more likely to lose clout than gain it as the contest to succeed him gains steam next year.
"This is the year in which there's a rendezvous with reality," says Jack Pitney, a political scientist at Claremont McKenna College and co-author of After Hope and Change: The 2013 Elections and American Politics.
So like it or not, Obama chose to take a longer-term — and smaller-bore — view. His remarks were laced with more populism and more humor than before, perhaps liberated from some of political calculations of previous years. "Kids, call your mom and walk her through the application," he said, urging people to sign up for health insurance coverage as he delivered a rare, full-throated defense of the Affordable Care Act. "It will give her some peace of mind – plus, she'll appreciate hearing from you."
At times, Obama seemed to be looking well past his presidency.
"Over more than three decades, even before the Great Recession hit, massive shifts in technology and global competition had eliminated a lot of good, middle-class jobs, and weakened the economic foundations that families depend on," he said. "Our job is to reverse these tides. It won't happen right away, and we won't agree on everything. But what I offer tonight is a set of concrete, practical proposals to speed up growth, strengthen the middle class, and build new ladders of opportunity into the middle class."
He said he was "eager" to work with Congress when possible but ready to bypass it if necessary. "Wherever and whenever I can take steps without legislation to expand opportunity for more American families, that's what I'm going to do."
'THE PEN AND THE PHONE'
Even the advisers tasked with previewing his new approach acknowledged that executive actions are less potent and less permanent than legislation.
"I wouldn't tell you that executive action is a substitute for major bipartisan legislation; it's not," senior White House adviser Dan Pfeiffer told USA TODAY's Capital Download newsmaker series. "But what we're not going to do is wait around for Congress to act. We're going to try every day to move the ball forward either with what executive authority the president has." The White House has been calling that campaign "the pen and the phone," a reference to the president's power to sign executive orders, impose regulations and convene, say, college presidents or corporate CEOs to agree on joint voluntary action.
MORE: White House adviser: On jobless benefits, let's talk
The pen and the phone are typically no match for the law, though. On his own, Obama was able to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour for new federal contract workers — a group that over time would include perhaps a few hundred thousand people — while legislation raising the minimum wage would affect millions. The CEOs' promise not to discriminate against the long-term jobless may be cold comfort to the 1.6 million Americans who have lost extended unemployment benefits since they expired just after Christmas.
While there is a rhythm to every presidency, and no year is likely to be as inspirational as the first, the difference in tone and approach between last year's address and this one was more dramatic than any previous year-to-year change during of his tenure.
Still, the State of the Union was designed not only to press the president's agenda but also to frame a message for Democrats in the 2014 midterm elections. Democrats face a clear risk of losing the net six seats that would cost them their majority in the Senate. In words sure to resonate with core Democratic voters, he made appeals for equal pay for women, for voting rights, for protecting "pristine" lands.
In the end, the most important thing Obama could do in the speech was convince Americans that he still can put his ideas into action, says Jon Favreau, who helped draft his previous State of the Union Addresses before leaving the White House staff last year. He says the speech needed to "give the American people a sense that he has a vision, he has a plan for moving the country forward, and not only does he have ideas but he has a plan to get those ideas through."
MORE: Obama State of the Union lessons: Beware of spilt milk
Obama's vow: "Let's make this a year of action."
THE GOP'S CIVIL WAR
What's galling for the president's biggest fans is that last year's agenda wasn't undone by the economy, which is improving, or by a lack of public support on particular issues. From gun control to immigration, Obama has been standing on the same side as solid majorities of Americans.
Three of four back raising the minimum wage, the most recent USA TODAY poll found. Two of three endorse extending long-term unemployment benefits.
Instead, Obama's agenda has been stymied by a GOP majority in the House that has become more conservative and combative — and less willing to engage in political give-and-take — than any Congress in the modern era. Congressional Republicans have been united against Obama and his proposals even when they are divided on other fronts.
Indeed, after Obama finished speaking, the civil war in the GOP was on display: Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington state was delivering the official Republican response. Sen. Mike Lee of Utah delivering the Tea Party response. Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, a leader of the libertarian wing and a potential 2016 presidential contender, delivering a response as well.
All took Obama to task.
"Too many people are falling further and further behind because, right now, the president's policies are making people's lives harder," Rodgers said in excerpts released before she spoke. Lee made a similar charge but also added, "The Republican establishment in Washington can be just as out-of-touch as the Democratic establishment."
The divided opposition hasn't helped Obama prevail, however. If anything, it has made it more difficult for House Speaker John Boehner to cut a deal even when the Ohio Republican might have wanted to do so on a "grand bargain" on the budget and other issues.
The contrasting approaches the president took last year and Tuesday night were each appropriate to the moment, says Michael Waldman, who helped draft six State of the Union addresses for former president Bill Clinton and is now president of the non-partisan Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School.
"He had to test the limits of what he could achieve last year," Waldman says of Obama. "He had just won a very convincing re-election. It was a moment to see if the congressional dynamic had changed. But the division and gridlock is so deeply ingrained, it turned out it could defeat even that momentum."
Now, he says, "he needs to very sharply pivot toward an approach and an agenda that doesn't rely on Congress acting to be the judge of success."
Which is precisely what Obama was trying to do.
Source: Top Stories - Google News - http://ift.tt/1mV2Qz2
0 comments:
Post a Comment