My latest in the American News:
Barack Obama attained electoral success to the melodic strains of “change.” But his more ardent followers might find some discordant notes in the coming administration. Obama faces numerous constraints on his ability to act.
The most obvious constraint is Congress. Surely Obama has the advantage of substantial majorities in both the House and Senate, but Congress answers to different constituencies than does a president.
House Ways and Means chair Charlie Rangel certainly has his own ideas regarding taxation. Other committee chairs and congressional leaders have their own constituencies to serve. While they will follow Obama's lead up to a point, history indicates that the sailing might not be as smooth as some assume.
Another constraint on Obama is that he cannot really claim a mandate. First, winning 53 percent of the popular vote is not exactly a landslide. Also, those who voted for him did so for differing reasons. Some voted for him because of his Iraq policy. For some it was the financial meltdown. Some people had a nebulous desire for “change” that had no policy content. Some Obama voters, in fact, didn't really vote for Obama at all as much as against George Bush and the Republicans.
Presidential scholars call this a “coalition of minorities” that adds up to electoral majority. That coalition falls apart as a president governs and inevitably offends parts of that coalition.
The very financial crisis that helped propel Obama to the White House also constrains him. A serious recession will raise government spending by increasing demands for social services while also lowering tax revenues. This is why some analysts predict a deficit as large as $1 trillion for the next fiscal year.
Obama will find it fiscally impossible to fulfill his campaign promises to increase spending on health care, education, alternative energy and infrastructure all while cutting taxes for 95 percent of tax payers.
Finally, Obama made various foreign policy pronouncements, some of which already have been rendered moot. The Iraqi government recently voted to allow American troops to remain another three years. Besides, military officials say that it is logistically impossible to meet Obama's goal of removing troops within 16 months.
A newly aggressive Russia, a decline in world oil prices, the instability of the North Korean regime and dozens of other unpredictable events will likely cause Obama to form a Clintonian foreign policy defined by a liberal internationalism where America takes the lead in promoting certain priorities.
It is no accident that the team forming around Obama bears suspicious resemblance to the Clinton administration, perhaps including Hillary Clinton as secretary of state. Obama smartly seems to have concluded that the transformative change he campaigned on is largely unworkable in the current political and economic environment.
The “change” of the Obama campaign might quickly become a centrist and pragmatic “third way” administration. We could do much worse.
Recent Comments