LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
2010 Webby Award Winner for Best Political Blog
 
February 20, 2012
Log in / Register

 Choose a size
Text Size

Most Read

Acts of Love

Ideological Hypocrites

OWS Calls for May Day Strike

Krugman to Playboy: Economic Crisis 'Doesn't Have to Be Happening'

When Iran Talks Back

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports
 * NEW! * Acts of Love
 * NEW! * Ideological Hypocrites
The Lowdown on Fracking

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
Déjà Pooh

Digs
Financial Meltdown 101

Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Reports

Obama’s Long, Hard Summer

Email this item Email    Print this item Print   

Posted on Jul 6, 2009

By E.J. Dionne, Jr.

    As President Obama confronts his testing time this summer, he holds major assets but faces deep tensions within his governing coalition. This will force him to make hard choices earlier than he might have preferred.

    His assets include steady affection from a large majority of the country, a political base as solid as the one that allowed Ronald Reagan to govern effectively even through slides in his popularity, and a weak Republican Party whose support is confined to the right end of the political spectrum.

    At the same time, Obama will be called upon to manage growing friction within his majority between its large progressive core and its less ideological fringes.

    For progressives, the president’s long-term political well-being depends upon delivering tangible benefits to middle-class voters in areas such as health care, education and financial security, even at the risk of temporarily higher budget deficits.

    Many of his moderate supporters worry about those deficits and express more skepticism than progressives do about government’s capacity to bring about change. Yet the attitudes toward government held by Obama’s middle-of-the-road sympathizers are characterized not by the hostility that animates conservatives, but by ambivalence and uncertainty.

Advertisement

    On no issue will these tensions be as important, or as difficult, to resolve as on health care.

    While moderates in the Senate press for a less robust approach to reform, progressives fear the impact of conceding too much ground. Such accommodations, they believe, would create a health plan that still required politically painful tax increases but delivered too few tangible gains to the middle-income Americans looking to Obama to improve their situations.

    The danger is that the political center in Congress—particularly in the Senate—is not the same as the political center in the country. For example, while some moderate Democrats express skepticism about including a government option as one choice within a reformed health care system, many recent polls have shown broad support for such a public plan.

    For senators, the issue is ideological, and their views are also driven by the concerns of interest groups. For most voters, however, the public plan is an additional and welcome choice that expands their ability to bargain within the health care marketplace.

    Despite these challenges, Obama enters the second half of the year with approval ratings that hover between the high 50s and mid-60s. Like Reagan, Obama enjoys nearly unanimous favorability within his own party. He wins approval from nine Democrats in 10, and liberals give him similar ratings.

    Obama is also holding the political center. His approval has stayed in the 55 percent to 65 percent range among independents, and between 65 percent and 70 percent among moderates.

    The major change in the polls over Obama’s first months in office has been a consolidation of opposition to him on the political right. A recent Gallup survey found that among conservative Republicans, just 16 percent approved of Obama’s performance, and among all self-described conservatives, his approval ratings are in the mid-30s.

    This creates a problem for Republican political leaders. Their aggressive attacks on the president earn cheers from their own base, but are out of line with a public that continues to give Obama the benefit of the doubt. It’s thus not surprising that a recent Washington-Post/ABC survey found that only 36 percent of Americans held a favorable opinion of the Republican Party; 56 percent had a negative view. Other polls show the GOP in even worse shape.

    Still, it will get more difficult for Obama to maintain support from both the left and the center as he faces potentially divisive choices in the context of a stricken economy.

    If short-term pressures to accommodate concerns about the deficit curb Obama’s ambitions, the result could be not only disaffection among progressives but also disappointment among the less ideologically inclined. Despite their skepticism about government, most in this latter constituency still want Washington to foster economic expansion and improve their health coverage.

    The president will thus have to balance worries about losing some moderate support against the larger danger of failing to achieve the sweeping change he promised. And centrist Democrats in Congress could usefully recall that the party’s inability to deliver on Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign pledges, particularly on health care, led to a stunning defeat two years later that decimated its moderates and liberals alike.

    In his first six months, Obama showed he was up to the job. This summer will test his ability to make agonizing choices—and make them stick. 

    E.J. Dionne’s e-mail address is ejdionne(at)washpost.com.
 
    © 2009, Washington Post Writers Group


Comments

Are you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig.

By Cathy, July 8, 2009 at 1:13 pm Link to this comment

I’m going to say one thing, based on what Sepharad said about O’s long, hard summer.  I don’t care, either.  If he wants to make the summer a little fun then he should start listening to people—AND LEAD. 

Michelle?  What is her opinion on health care, BTW?  Hillary had one when she was FLOTUS, we know that. 

And what about another person who speaks loud and clear, gets noticed whenever she opens her mouth, and is Obama’s biggest cheerleader—Oprah.  Since she so heavily and loudly backed Obama, what is her stance on health care?  Coming from a humble background she, too, should understand how critical the health care issue is. 

Oh, that’s right.  She’s got the pharmaceutical and insurance bloodsuckers as major, major advertisers.

There’s a lot of high-profile people who supported Obama that seem struck dumb suddenly on the issue of health care.

Report this

By Litl Bludot, July 8, 2009 at 12:08 pm Link to this comment

The Dems and Obushama (I like that bogi666) have no real intention of having a public option.  That proposal serves two purposes,

one is to get people who are for single payer to switch over to the “public option”, and thereby undercut single payer.

two is to get campaign funds from the insurance corporations.  i.e. the Dems and Obushama are leveraging the public option for power.

That’s the game.  It’s all about money and power.  Every “change” mentioned by Obushama, is an issue to be leveraged to the fascist corporate state.  Financial reform, where did that go?  It was leverage to the banksters.  So it goes.

Report this

By Sleeper, July 8, 2009 at 8:17 am Link to this comment

The Dems need to deliver in a number of ways.  We really need a single payer one size fits all healthcare system. 

Anything less will result in basically the managed competion of the Clinton era.  The competition was on how fast the insurance companies could extract more money for premiums, reduce payouts for coverage and the drug companies managed to increase their profits while patients were choosing between food and meds.

People got feed up with the ultra fascists of the R’s and the facist lite of the blue dogs.  They fell for the sound bites of less government intrution, deregulation, and taxcuts.  Failure to preform will end up sending us further into Empire Building, but its not our Empire.  It is an Empire for the very few with all the politicians on the take and no Truth or regulation, just a synthesized story that really doesn’t fit.

Report this

By Anonymous, July 8, 2009 at 5:09 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I have a sinking feeling that the “Dems” are, with some exceptions, DINOs, and are in fact orchestrating their own defeat, despite strong populist impulses from the electorate.  I get the impression that all have been infected by some Bilderberg mob or New World Order entity that we the people cannot see.  That’s the only explanation I have for Obama’s seeming “timidity” on matters for which he has strong public support.  It’s not a good feeling.

Report this

By Sepharad, July 7, 2009 at 2:02 pm Link to this comment

If Obama does not deliver a public medicare health plan not organized by the insurance companies, I’m never voting Democratic again. No matter who is running or what they say. And I’m so sorry O. is having such a tough summer. Tell that to people losing homes, jobs, health coverage.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, July 7, 2009 at 7:36 am Link to this comment

Replace Christina Romer and keep Larry Summers, etc.?  What’s the point?

Report this

By anonymous, July 6, 2009 at 5:07 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

A recent column in The Guardian, citing Obama’s willingness to go along with what Congress decided on the stimulus bill, called Obama a cheerleader for reform rather than a leader of reform. I agree with Mr. Dionne that health insurance reform, and health care reform more generally, will be a real test for the president.

One thing E.J. alluded to indirectly was Obama’s declining poll numbers when it comes to confidence in his handling of the economy, and in my opinion, one step the president might take to improve voters’ confidence would be to replace Christina Romer as a public spokesperson for the White House on economic matters. I am afraid I do not find her on-air manner very confidence-inspiring.

Report this

By bogi666, July 6, 2009 at 11:56 am Link to this comment

Obushama and the Democrats cannot win without the liberal Democrats, it’s that simple. The so called public option on health care really does not address health care it only addresses health insurance. The public option is a set up for failure, it simply can’t work. With the insurance companies involved in engineering a “public option” they will engineer it in such a way so that they can then claim “we told you so, the government has no business meddling in health insurance. This proves government can’t work just like we said”. Obushama has to articulate his message and explaining the difference between health care and health insurance is where to start. The insurance companies morph the two to seem the same when they are not. As it stands now their is no health care industry, except Medicare, their is only a health insurance industry. The opponents mantra of “a government bureaucrat making health decisions for you” never continue on that it is an insurance company bureaucrat now makes that decision and get bonuses for denying benefits by rejecting claims. Just who has the bigger incentive to deny benefits to claimants? The Repubican Party claims that no health insurance is better than “socialized ” medical care. The Repubican answer to the American people about health care is EAT SHIT AND DIE!

Report this

By Litl Bludot, July 6, 2009 at 9:38 am Link to this comment

The basis of the article is faulty.  The choice for Obama is simple, either he continues to get paid off by the banksters, insurance companies, weapons manufacturers, oil companies and prison builders, OR, he morphs into what he pretended to be when he ran for president.

My hope is that Michelle Obama will realize she married an educated, calculating, immoral, charming pi,p for the rich, and divorce him.  But then again, maybe,,,,,

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, July 6, 2009 at 9:05 am Link to this comment

Naturally Mr. O would like it if we would just stop thinking for ourselves and follow his submission to the ruling class and their interests.  I don’t think he’s going to get this from any sector of the electorate, though, and least of all liberals, progressives, or the Left.

Since much of the Right seems to have gone off the deep end, I wonder if we’re not going to see some new activity on the Left, plus a sort of revival of Perot-style centrist reformism, as competition for the apparently inept Democrats.  It’s very odd to see someone with Mr. O’s popularity run around kissing the rich folks’ butts so very thoroughly.  I don’t get it.

Report this
Paul_GA's avatar

By Paul_GA, July 6, 2009 at 8:04 am Link to this comment

With all due respect to Mr. Dionne, the Democrats’ coming through on gun control—the Brady Bill and the much-ballyhooed “assault weapon ban”—played as big a role in the Democrats’ losing control of the Congress in 1994 as “the party’s inability to deliver on Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign pledges”; maybe even a bigger role.

And that, BTW, is (as I see it) why Obama & Co. are leaving gun control strictly alone.

Report this

By Cathy, July 6, 2009 at 6:58 am Link to this comment

It gets worse, ardee.  This article in WaPo had all of the progressives—and I’ve discovered that includes me—really up in arms.  Until the Obama camp debunks this article in some way that is believable, I will have to assume these are Obama’s feelings:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/04/obama-urges-health-care-a_n_225716.html

I read this article two or three times to make sure I had it right.  The President of the United States telling advocacy groups that helped get him elected to stop “attacking.”  He says we should work with him to push his health reform plan through.  What plan would that be?  I haven’t read anything comprehensive out of the WH.  I have read the Kennedy/Dodd joke of a plan, which basically will put the nation on the road to the disastrous Massachusetts’ plan.

So the Prez asks us not to exercise our Constitutional rights.  This came out on the 4th of July.

Report this

By Kay Johnson, July 6, 2009 at 5:55 am Link to this comment

Yesterday, I read Matt Taibbi’s current article in the Rolling Stone magazine. In the article, he reported that Barack Obama received $981,000 from the so-called health care industry while he was campaigning. Max Baucus, Montana; Ben Nelson, Nebraska; and countless other senators and representatives have also received obscene amounts of money, adding up to millions and even billions of dollars, from the same lobbyists and corporations.

This morning, on Democracy Now!, Amy Goodman reported, verbatim:

Report: Health Industry Employing Hundreds of Ex-Gov. Officials—

Here in the United States, the Washington Post is reporting the nation’s heath care industry has hired more than 350 former government officials and members of Congress to sway health care reform efforts on Capital Hill. According to lobbying records, three out of every four major health care companies have at least one former government insider on the payroll. Nearly half held positions under key committees and lawmakers including Senators Max Baucus and Charles Grassley. Baucus is chair of the Senate Finance Committee which is largely steering health care reform efforts. Baucus’s aides recently held a meeting with a group of lobbyists that included two of his former chiefs of staff. The Washington Post says the health care industry is now spending $1.4 million dollars a day on lobbying, totaling $126 million dollars in the first fiscal quarter.
———
To say the least, our elected officials do not represent “we the people,” we citizens, and in my mind, the phrase, “conflict of interest,” is an understatement. Can it be any more clear that we are not being represented by our elected officials?

More than 70% of the population prefers a government option to compete with the corporate programs—more to the point, people want single-payer and “medicare for all.”

The depraved indifference of our government, which includes our elected officials, minus a few like Bernie Sanders, Dennis Kucinich, Barabara Lee, etc.—that 20,000 people, or more, die every year because they don’t have health care insurance, or don’t have enough health insurance, or are thrown under the bus as soon as they get sick is an egregious crime. Some lawyer, or group of lawyers, somewhere, ought to figure out an angle to take these crooks to court for killing innocent civilians, who are citizens of this country.

Report this
ardee's avatar

By ardee, July 6, 2009 at 1:49 am Link to this comment

Obama may very well be trapped in a dilemma of his own making. He campaigned against Bush not McCain, he sought to expunge the taint that Bush/Cheney brought to our governance by calling for substantive changes to many policies and directions; government secrecy, for example, the war in Iraq for another. There was mention of reregulation of the financial community.

Now we see no such push, instead we have given away a trillion dollars to the same folks who crushed our economy for personal gain and any attempt to regulate use of those funds results in threats to give the money back and no regulation to speak of, we see a continuation, not an abatement, of government secrecy, we are increasingly trapped in Afghanistan and Pakistan and have yet to see what troop reductions in Iraq will bring.

As to health care, well, noone is speaking to any systemic change that will actually bring fiscal sanity to that industry. Further there appears to be no great rallying behind Obama from the halls of the legislature. His own party, despite the ability to ram through much correction and modernization, and not just in health care, waffles and hesitates, significant numbers even voting with the GOP on occasion.

The midterm elections might be sen as a bellweather, not only of Obama’s continued popularity , but of support for democrats who cannot get things done in Congress. In fact, the best thing the democrats have going for them is the unbelievable ineptitude of the GOP. But that may not continue, and a lie repeated often enough becomes as truth to the public.

Report this

Add Your Comment

Posts by unregistered readers are moderated. Posts by members
are published immediately. Why wait? Register today!






                        Number of characters remaining: 4000

Are you a human? Retype the word you see here.

     

Please read and abide by our comment policy.
By submitting this comment, you agree to this site's terms and conditions.

Newsletter

Get Truthdig in your inbox


 
 
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2012 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.