GOP Offers Debt Ceiling Sanity....for a few months
Coming out of the House GOP retreat, where they are presumably discussing their strategy and vision for the next 2 years and specifically how they are going to hold on to the House in 2014, comes word that the GOP will offer up a more or less "clean" increase of the debt ceiling to ward off default.
It comes with a few strings attached. The extension would only be for 3 months, meaning that we would be having the same discussion again in May or June. It would require both houses of Congress to pass a budget by April 15th or forfeit pay, something that the Senate has not done in several years, a fact that has been a talking point for the GOP.
It is possible that President Obama and the Democrats will have some issue with the proposal. The 3 month extension falls far short of the kind of extension or even elimination of the debt ceiling that the President had sought, hoping to avert having to deal with debt ceiling issue again in his Presidency. And Senate Democrats might balk at needing to pass a budget resolution.
But it seems like a savvy move for the GOP. It would be a tough sell for Democrats to vote against the debt ceiling increase they asked for. And I don't know very many people who would be too concerned about the possibility of Representatives and Senators not getting paid for a little while.
1 Term Down, 1 To Go
President Obama's will celebrate his second inauguration on Monday. It will be a more subdued ceremony than the celebration four years ago, when the country was less divided and we hadn't endured such a long economic malaise. But it will be a unifying moment for supporters of the President and a day of patriotism for all.
While the inauguration is on Monday, the official start of the President's second term is at noon tomorrow, as dictated by the constitution and the President will privately retake the oath of office then, before going through the ceremony on Monday.
Being at the end of the President's first 4 years, I thought it would be a good time to take stock of how the President has done.
(1) Did He Keep His Promises?
Politifact.com (run by the Tampa Bay Times) has did a great job of tracking all of the promises that the President made in the 2008 campaign and how they have turned out.
There were 508 documented promises made and of those, 239 were fully kept, 130 were partially kept and 139 were not kept. Those not kept were not kept for a variety of reasons - either the President changing his position (closing Gitmo, for instance), simply not pursuing something he promised to do (giving a State of the World address, for instance) or his desired policies changing as a result of negotiation with Congress (extending the Bush tax cuts for upper income limits for instance.)
Giving the President 100% for promises fully kept and 50% for those partially kept, the President gets 304 points out of a possible 508 or a score of 60%.
I said at the beginning of his term that it would be an A-worthy performance if the President could do half of the things he promised to do in 2008. A score of 60% certainly qualifies.
Grade: A
(2) Did He Achieve His Major Policy Goals?
The President had articulated six clear policy goals for his first term at the outset:
a. Implement a meaningful stimulus
On this issue, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act achieved almost all of what the President set out to achieve. It provided aid to states, funds for infrastructure improvements and targeted tax cuts. Couple this with the (just expired) temporary Social Security tax rate reductions that the President was able to get in 2010 and you have to say the President basically implemented what he set out to implement. There is much debate on the effectiveness of those policies, but here we are grading whether he did what he set out to do.
Grade: A
b. Implement Health Care Reform That Achieves Universal Coverage
The coverage is not quite universal (2% are excluded), the plan doesn't contain a public option, it does contain a mandate (something he opposed on the campaign trail) and the President gave up very early on including abortion coverage in the plan (another thing he campaigned on.) Still, President Obama was successful where Presidents Johnson, Nixon, Carter and Clinton failed (President Reagan and both Presidents Bush were not advocates for such a program.) The carefully negotiated program was passed through congress narrowly and was narrowly upheld as largely constitutional by the Supreme Court. It is the law of the land and will roll out over his second term. We will all get to see how successful it is or isn't.
Grade: B+
c. Repeal the Bush Tax Cuts for Those Making Over $250K
The President completely punted on this once, agreeing to a 2-year extension in late 2010, in exchange for some other goodies, such as the Social Security Tax deal. The President did better recently, at the end of his term, cutting a deal that let the rates rise on individuals making over $400K and couples making over $450K, about half of the population the President was targeting to contribute more.
Grade: C
d. Pass Meaningful Legislation to Deal with Carbon Emissions
A Cap and Trade bill passed the House in 2009 but was never even taken up in the Senate and there has been virtually no leadership from the President on making this stated priority happen. There were smaller steps that did happen, such as tax credits for energy efficient homes and appliances and extensions of wind and solar subsidies. But all-in-all, the President hasn't made much progress here.
Grade: D+
e. Provide for Comprehensive Immigration Reform
Perhaps it will be a second term issue. But the President never even proposed a package of immigration reform, something which he had stated he would do in his first year in office. He took some action by executive order, such as the regulatory version of the Dream Act, but these actions were taken very late in his term and fall far short of comprehensive reform.
Grade: D
f. End the War in Iraq and Provide Additional Troops, on a Timetable in Afghanistan
The President basically did everything he said he would here. We are out of Iraq. We did surge in Afghanistan, but are now winding down our involvement, in line with the time table the President set.
Grade: A
Overall Grade on Priorities: B-
(3) How Did We Fare Economically?
This is a quite complicated question, given the deep recession that was underway at the start of his term. By some economic measures, the President doesn't make the grade, by others he does.
Average Annual GDP Growth During His Term: 2.1% (average 20 years prior to Obama = 3.8%)
Average Unemployment Rate During His Term: 9.0% (average 20 years prior to Obama = 6.0%)
Stock Market Return During His Term: 12.1% (average 20 years prior to Obama = 9.9%)
By the standards of economic growth and unemployment, the last 4 years have not been among our better ones. Following a deep recession, we have had slow growth with sustained high unemployment over several years. While unemployment is now falling, it is doing so painfully slowly and at least in part due to less people in the workforce. By these measures, President Obama doesn't rate well.
However, putting those numbers in proper context is difficult since anyone could have predicted following the financial crisis that unemployment would be elevated and growth depressed, at least for a period of time. This is where the stock market return comes in. The stock market price reflects both present economic circumstances and expectations around future economic performance. On this measure, the President is doing great, far exceeding normal market returns and, given that those are nominal returns and inflation has been very low, real returns exceed by an even greater margin.
Of course, stock market expectations can be wrong. The stock market was wildly over-priced in 1999 and wildly under priced in 1982. So while some of change in expectations can be due to averting crises or sounder policies, some is also due to mean reversion or, in common language, irrational panic or optimism abating.
So, it is difficult as we stand here today to judge the President's economic performance. We didn't fall off a cliff and into a depression, something that seemed like a real possibility in 2008. But we also haven't had a "V-shaped recovery" where the economy grows quickly after purging the less efficient elements in a recession. It is a mixed bag.
Grade; C
The President has a lot to tackle in his second term. The deficit is still out-of-control, with no path to balance in sight. Immigration and climate change remain unsolved issues. The economy, while not in crisis, is certainly not healthy, particularly for the lower-middle class.
I wish him luck as he begins his second term, for all our sakes.
If you like this site, tell your friends.
Showing posts with label cap and trade. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cap and trade. Show all posts
Saturday, January 19, 2013
Monday, January 25, 2010
Biden Out (Beau That Is), Bayh at Risk, Full Steam Ahead on Health Care?, Your Guide to the State of the Union
Beau Isn't Running
Beau Biden has decided not to seek the Senate seat that was vacated by his father assuming the Vice Presidency this past January. This is a major blow to Democrats in the state, who had been counting on the popular Biden brand name to carry the race against very popular At Large Rep. Mike Castle (R). With Biden out of the race and no star candidates in the mix, I'll move this race from a Toss-Up to a Lean GOP Pick-Up, pending polling information.
I guess the move wasn't terribly shocking, as this is shaping up to be a rough year for Democrats in November and Biden would've been fighting a pick 'em race against a popular ex-Governor and rare true moderate. Why should Biden risk his popularity now, when he could wait for an easier shot, in a better year, in heavily Democratic Delaware.
Bayh No Lock
Popular, well, at least, I thought he was popular, moderate Sen. Evan Bayh (D) will not have a walk either in his race either. A just-released Rasmussen poll shows him down 3% against potential opponent Rep. Mark Pence and up only 3% against less well known John Hostettler.
It is not clear yet if Pence will run and this is only one poll. I will move it from a Likely DEM Hold to a Lean DEM Hold pending information on Pence's possibly candidacy and additional polling. This is another one to add to the mix of races that would've seemed like easy defenses a year ago but are now competitive. The same poll found Obama's Approve minus Disapprove in Indiana to be at -13%, in a state that he won by a slim margin in 2008.
Full Speed Ahead with Health Care?
Reports out of Washington are that after President Obama's seeming concession to a smaller-scale health care bill that Pelosi and Reid may push ahead with a two-pronged approach of passing the Senate measure in the House and then using reconciliation to make changes to the bill later on.
The reconciliation process would require only 51 Senate votes but can only be used on the provisions related to taxation and spending. So, for instance, they could be used to alter the provisions pertaining to taxes on high-cost insurance plans, but could not be used to modify the provisions related to pre-existing conditions. It is debatable whether modifying the abortion-funding rules falls within the scope of reconciliation, and that is likely to be a contentious issue with passing the bill in the House. But it is likely if the House passed the bill that Democrats could muster 60 votes for a stand-alone change to explicitly prohibit abortion funding, if it was part of the quid pro quo.
If the reports of this plan are true, this is a dramatically bold plan, in the face of the Massachusetts defeat. But it is also the best possible long-term path for Democrats. To come out of two years with dominant majorities without real reform on their signature issue would be a disaster. And while the GOP likes to point to the unpopularity of the overall bill, almost all of the individual provisions of the bill are popular, indicating to me that the public may like it better as a law than they did as a bill.
Even if Pelosi and Reid push ahead with this plan, it is far from a done deal. They have to convince liberals to accept a more moderate Senate bill and have to convince at least some Blue Dogs that this bill is worth risking their necks in November for. No easy feat given the way the Democratic party has been running scared for the past week. But we'll see.
State of the Union Viewers Guide
President Obama gives his first official State of the Union speech tomorrow night, although his address to a joint session of Congress a year ago was essentially the same forum, and in light of the events of the past couple of weeks, it is highly anticipated for us political watchers. Here are my things to watch:
(1) What does he say about his priorities from last year?
Is it full steam ahead on Health Care, public opinion be damned? Is this a moral or an economic issue? Will we scale back or push for all we can get? Or is this issue headed to the back burner with little mention?
Is Cap and Trade still on the table? Will the President push it or ignore that priority from last year? Will he say anything about Copenhagen?
(2) Jobs, Jobs, Jobs
What will he stay about the stimulus? Call it successful but not enough? Say that it did what was intended? What will he propose going forward? What promises will he make about unemployment, if any?
(3) The Deficit
The rumor is that he is going to propose a 3-year freeze on spending for a large portion of domestic discretionary spending. Was this a trial balloon or will he propose it? Will he talk about sun-setting the Bush tax cuts in 2011? What will he say about the balance of the stimulus? How about the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan? Will he even mention entitlement reform, the elephant in the room? Will he explicitly push Congress to appoint a bi-partisan commission, with a straight up or down vote on their recommendations?
(4) Foreign Policy
Does it get much mention or is it pushed to the back? What will he say about GITMO and his failure to meet one of his first executive orders? Will he talk about winding down Iraq? Any shift in tone on Afghanistan?
(5) Small Ball / Triangulation
Will we see some Bill Clinton-style small ball, triangulated initiatives? Remember 100,000 more cops on the street and Family Medical Leave -- are things like this in the offing? WIll the tone be more about the big, bold ideas or the small practical ones?
(6) What is the State of the Union?
I remember Bill Clinton saying "the State of the Union has never been stronger", a triumphant declaration of victory in a time of sub 4% unemployment and the beginnings of the internet boom. Clearly the President can't say this. But what will he say that recognizes the struggle ordinary people are feeling yet conveys confidence in the future? How will he solve the "Stockdale Paradox", named for Admiral Stockdale, who, as a POW in Vietnam, figured out a way to remain confident that he would be rescued without setting a specific date.
It is an almost impossible speech given the current circumstances, but the President needs a home run performance to recharge his administration and his priorities. He needs to walk the line between pragmatic and bold. He needs some quick wins and some big wins. Most of all, he needs to reshape the dialogue.
I'll be watching, as I suspect most of you will too. State of the Unions are always impressive and entertaining, with all the trappings of Congress and the Presidency. And they do matter in terms of setting the agenda, perhaps more than any other speeches. And perhaps no speech given by a President known for giving some famous speeches, will be more important to his Presidency.
If you like this site, tell your friends.
Beau Biden has decided not to seek the Senate seat that was vacated by his father assuming the Vice Presidency this past January. This is a major blow to Democrats in the state, who had been counting on the popular Biden brand name to carry the race against very popular At Large Rep. Mike Castle (R). With Biden out of the race and no star candidates in the mix, I'll move this race from a Toss-Up to a Lean GOP Pick-Up, pending polling information.
I guess the move wasn't terribly shocking, as this is shaping up to be a rough year for Democrats in November and Biden would've been fighting a pick 'em race against a popular ex-Governor and rare true moderate. Why should Biden risk his popularity now, when he could wait for an easier shot, in a better year, in heavily Democratic Delaware.
Bayh No Lock
Popular, well, at least, I thought he was popular, moderate Sen. Evan Bayh (D) will not have a walk either in his race either. A just-released Rasmussen poll shows him down 3% against potential opponent Rep. Mark Pence and up only 3% against less well known John Hostettler.
It is not clear yet if Pence will run and this is only one poll. I will move it from a Likely DEM Hold to a Lean DEM Hold pending information on Pence's possibly candidacy and additional polling. This is another one to add to the mix of races that would've seemed like easy defenses a year ago but are now competitive. The same poll found Obama's Approve minus Disapprove in Indiana to be at -13%, in a state that he won by a slim margin in 2008.
Full Speed Ahead with Health Care?
Reports out of Washington are that after President Obama's seeming concession to a smaller-scale health care bill that Pelosi and Reid may push ahead with a two-pronged approach of passing the Senate measure in the House and then using reconciliation to make changes to the bill later on.
The reconciliation process would require only 51 Senate votes but can only be used on the provisions related to taxation and spending. So, for instance, they could be used to alter the provisions pertaining to taxes on high-cost insurance plans, but could not be used to modify the provisions related to pre-existing conditions. It is debatable whether modifying the abortion-funding rules falls within the scope of reconciliation, and that is likely to be a contentious issue with passing the bill in the House. But it is likely if the House passed the bill that Democrats could muster 60 votes for a stand-alone change to explicitly prohibit abortion funding, if it was part of the quid pro quo.
If the reports of this plan are true, this is a dramatically bold plan, in the face of the Massachusetts defeat. But it is also the best possible long-term path for Democrats. To come out of two years with dominant majorities without real reform on their signature issue would be a disaster. And while the GOP likes to point to the unpopularity of the overall bill, almost all of the individual provisions of the bill are popular, indicating to me that the public may like it better as a law than they did as a bill.
Even if Pelosi and Reid push ahead with this plan, it is far from a done deal. They have to convince liberals to accept a more moderate Senate bill and have to convince at least some Blue Dogs that this bill is worth risking their necks in November for. No easy feat given the way the Democratic party has been running scared for the past week. But we'll see.
State of the Union Viewers Guide
President Obama gives his first official State of the Union speech tomorrow night, although his address to a joint session of Congress a year ago was essentially the same forum, and in light of the events of the past couple of weeks, it is highly anticipated for us political watchers. Here are my things to watch:
(1) What does he say about his priorities from last year?
Is it full steam ahead on Health Care, public opinion be damned? Is this a moral or an economic issue? Will we scale back or push for all we can get? Or is this issue headed to the back burner with little mention?
Is Cap and Trade still on the table? Will the President push it or ignore that priority from last year? Will he say anything about Copenhagen?
(2) Jobs, Jobs, Jobs
What will he stay about the stimulus? Call it successful but not enough? Say that it did what was intended? What will he propose going forward? What promises will he make about unemployment, if any?
(3) The Deficit
The rumor is that he is going to propose a 3-year freeze on spending for a large portion of domestic discretionary spending. Was this a trial balloon or will he propose it? Will he talk about sun-setting the Bush tax cuts in 2011? What will he say about the balance of the stimulus? How about the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan? Will he even mention entitlement reform, the elephant in the room? Will he explicitly push Congress to appoint a bi-partisan commission, with a straight up or down vote on their recommendations?
(4) Foreign Policy
Does it get much mention or is it pushed to the back? What will he say about GITMO and his failure to meet one of his first executive orders? Will he talk about winding down Iraq? Any shift in tone on Afghanistan?
(5) Small Ball / Triangulation
Will we see some Bill Clinton-style small ball, triangulated initiatives? Remember 100,000 more cops on the street and Family Medical Leave -- are things like this in the offing? WIll the tone be more about the big, bold ideas or the small practical ones?
(6) What is the State of the Union?
I remember Bill Clinton saying "the State of the Union has never been stronger", a triumphant declaration of victory in a time of sub 4% unemployment and the beginnings of the internet boom. Clearly the President can't say this. But what will he say that recognizes the struggle ordinary people are feeling yet conveys confidence in the future? How will he solve the "Stockdale Paradox", named for Admiral Stockdale, who, as a POW in Vietnam, figured out a way to remain confident that he would be rescued without setting a specific date.
It is an almost impossible speech given the current circumstances, but the President needs a home run performance to recharge his administration and his priorities. He needs to walk the line between pragmatic and bold. He needs some quick wins and some big wins. Most of all, he needs to reshape the dialogue.
I'll be watching, as I suspect most of you will too. State of the Unions are always impressive and entertaining, with all the trappings of Congress and the Presidency. And they do matter in terms of setting the agenda, perhaps more than any other speeches. And perhaps no speech given by a President known for giving some famous speeches, will be more important to his Presidency.
If you like this site, tell your friends.
Friday, December 11, 2009
The Sort of Health Care Deal, Dirty Tricks and Bad Government, The Closely Divided Nation, A Tale of Two Tales
Democrats Strike a "Broad Agreement"
You have to give Senator Reid this...he is trying like hell to keep his caucus united behind health care reform. The announcement this week of a "broad agreement" between liberal and moderate Democrats on the public option potentially paves the way for passage of a health care bill from the Senate this year...maybe. Assuming Sen's Lieberman, Webb, Landrieu, Lincoln and Nelson are all on board with the agreement (Lieberman and Nelson being by far the most staunch critic of the public option, Webb and Nelson being the two Senators who have mostly voted with the GOP on recommit motions thus far and Senator Lincoln being among the most vulnerable to attack from the right on this issue in 2010), it settles one of the two key issues that has divided the Democratic caucus.
The agreement, in essence, would dissolve the public option in its present form and replace it with a hybrid system, whereby those 55 to 64 would be able to buy into the Medicare system (in essence, creating a "public option" for them, complete with the accompanying cost controls), while those 54 and under would be able to buy into a program that is managed by the government but provided by a private provider or private providers, similar to the government employees insurance program. It gives the public option liberals the 55 to 64 year old population on the public rolls and gives public option opponents the fact that no new government-run program is created.
The compromise is actually better in my eyes than the original legislation. The public option as originally designed in the Senate bill did little to curb costs as it would only allow the government to negotiate with providers, the same as any insurance company and would likely include only a pool of high-risk individuals, those who couldn't find a deal in the private market. The Medicare compromise allows the government to leverage its power to legislate compensation levels for people in the program and is a much more powerful carrier, since the program already contains basically everyone 65 and up. Providers could, as always refuse to treat people on Medicare, but rejecting providing care for all seniors is worlds different from rejecting providing care for a relatively smaller group of high-risk individuals. As has been the case with Medicare so far, I would guess most providers would play ball, which would mean favorable pricing and therefore cost containment. None of this helps the 54 and under crowd, but I'll take something over nothing.
But, the public option is not the only source of division in the Democratic caucus. The Senate also rejected the amendment offered by Senator Nelson this week that would have strengthened the prohibition of the inclusion of abortion coverage in the health care bill.
The bill, as presently written, prohibits use of government subsidies to pay for abortion coverage, but allows for abortion to be in the overall coverage schemes provided by private insurers, provided the portion of the coverage that covers abortion is funded through the out-of-pocket portion of the premium. In other words, if there is a $500/month health policy and the individual pays $100/month of that premium with the government picking up the rest of the tab, the policy could provide abortion coverage as long as the cost of that coverage is not more than $100/month. Nelson and other anti-abortion advocates (as well as some that favor abortion rights but are wary of funding abortions with federal dollars) object to the provision as currently written, since virtually all policies would have an individual contribution sufficient to fund abortion coverage, meaning that virtually all federally subsidized policies would be free to offer coverage for abortion services.
Senator Nelson's amendment would have expressly prohibited providing abortion coverage for subsidized policies. Essentially, it would require someone wanting abortion coverage to pay for a separate policy to insure abortions, although that could, theoretically come from the same company. It is very similar in language to the House amendment that Bart Stupak successfully pushed through in the House version of the bill. The senate rejected the amendment 54-45, with Republican Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe joining the majority of Democrats to defeat the amendment, which won the support of the remaining Republicans plus 7 Democrats.
Senator Nelson has said that he will not support the final bill with the abortion amendment, so assuming that Reid has agreement with all the Democrats on the public option, he will still need to win over either Nelson or one Republican (presumably Olympia Snowe) to carry the day and get his 60 votes.
Victory is in sight for Reid, but is still not assured. The Democrats would be wise to give ground on the abortion issue...it is unlikely that the bill could get back through the House without the provision anyway.
Which brings me to one more point...if the Democrats do get a bill through the Senate, why not vote on that bill in the House unamended and skip the conference committee process? Let me explain...ordinarily when the House and Senate pass differing versions of legislation, a conference committee from the two bodies melds the two bills into a final bill that is then revoted on by both houses. But that is not how it HAS to work. Given that any final bill would have to look essentially the same as the Senate bill, if one passes, why not just have the House adopt the Senate bill as is? It would shorten the process, dodge another tough fight in the Senate and get a bill to the President by year's end (assuming the Senate is able to move something by then, which is far from assured.)
The Senate is taking a break from health care for a few days while the CBO scores the Reid compromise. In the meantime, they are going to take up a truly awful example of:
Bad Government, Plain and Simple
I've written extensively on how fouled up the appropriations process has been this year and ever year in recent memory. It is the middle of December and the majority of agencies still don't have a budget for the fiscal year that started in October, but rather, have been operating on a series of continuing resolutions, which provide short-term extensions of last years budget into this year. So, basically, the departments have been operating tactically, unsure of what longer term projects will be approved and which will not. Not a great practice.
Enter the Minibus. A bill was shoved through the House this week by a 221-202 vote (all Republicans voting "no", joined by 28 Democrats) that would cover appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Commerce, Justice, Labor, Health and Human Services, Veterans Affairs and State in one fell swoop, leaving only the Department of Defense budget to be dealt with at a later date. The Senate will likely vote next week, before the present continuing resolution expires on December 18th.
So shouldn't I be happy that Congress is finally moving the ball on appropriations? Hell no! This massive bill was shoved through with almost no debate, with some of the departments not even having an initial bill that was debated in both houses of congress with an opportunity for amendment. The bill was voted on less than 24 hours after it was printed, leaving zero time for public examination of the legislation, which probably contains poor provisions and irresponsible earmarks that we may never even hear about until after it is law.
Yes, finally passing a budget is good. Doing it in the dark rather than in the sunlight is not. There are plenty of working days for congress to do its job before the fiscal year starts. This type of mess happens when they fail to show any type of discipline with the calendar. And one has to wonder if some members don't like it better this way....rammed through bills are easier to cram in pet provisions.
Democrats should be ashamed. Unfortunately, this issue is complex and mundane enough that it will likely garner little coverage or public outcry, as the whole budgeting process as failed to do, just like every year.
On the President, a Closely Divided Nation
It's obvious that they love President Obama in Europe still. The latest Nobel Peace Prize winner (nope, not going to rehash that debate) is a rock star overseas. He used to be a rockstar here. Now he seems all too human. On the question of whether the President is doing well, Americans are sharply divided, and getting closer and closer to even.
President Obama's aggregate approve minus disapprove numbers have tracked below his 7.2% November vote margin every day since November 29th, his first days below this benchmark threshold. This means that his coalition has shrunk since November. He has yet to have a day where his disapproves exceed his approves yet, but judging by the pattern, if he doesn't start getting some good news, it may be just a matter of time.
His monthly averages, with smooth out the bumps, show a decline of almost 4% from his November numbers to December, which would put him on track to have his worst month since August, when angry town halls and tea party protests dominated the news.
The Rest Is Still Unwritten...
The President's declining poll numbers bring me to my central thought about the Obama Presidency thus far...the road has not yet forked. What I mean by that is I can clearly imagine two distinct narratives being told at the mid-terms in November 2010. Here they are:
"A brutal night for the Democrats as the drag of unpopular President Barack Obama leads the Republicans to retake the House of Representatives and make significant inroads into the Democratic majority in the Senate. The President, who has been plagued by persistent double digit unemployment following his failed stimulus package as well as attacks on his ineffectiveness as a leader as he failed to get either health care reform or environmental legislation passed. His foreign policy is seen as an extension of the policy failures of the Bush administration as casualties mount in Afghanistan and Iraq slips back into civil unrest. Many Democrats are now wondering aloud how they elected a man of such little executive experience and what this will all mean for the future of the party."
or
"A discouraging night for Republicans as they not only fail to make inroads in the House, but lose key seats in the Senate with Democratic wins in Ohio and Missouri. Buoyed by a dropping unemployment rate and a victory on health care, the Democrats now hold the seats to pass legislation virtually at will. President Obama's popularity, at its height, is bolstered by the sense that he is the among the most accomplished first year Presidents in history, having passed not only the most sweeping Health Care reform policy since Lyndon Johnson, but having pulled the country out of the worst economic conditions since the Great Depression, as unemployment falls below 8%. President Obama is also bolstered by strong international support for his policies, which have ended the Iraq war while stabilizing Afghanistan and driving the Taliban into hiding."
Which narrative will we tell? Probably somewhere in between. The point is, we don't really know yet whether the President will get his way on key legislation or whether what he has done on the economy and in the foreign policy arena will work. But the stakes for the performance of the economy, the success of the President's Afghanistan strategy and the fate of Health Care legislation are immense. And not just for the Democrats.
If you like this site, tell your friends.
You have to give Senator Reid this...he is trying like hell to keep his caucus united behind health care reform. The announcement this week of a "broad agreement" between liberal and moderate Democrats on the public option potentially paves the way for passage of a health care bill from the Senate this year...maybe. Assuming Sen's Lieberman, Webb, Landrieu, Lincoln and Nelson are all on board with the agreement (Lieberman and Nelson being by far the most staunch critic of the public option, Webb and Nelson being the two Senators who have mostly voted with the GOP on recommit motions thus far and Senator Lincoln being among the most vulnerable to attack from the right on this issue in 2010), it settles one of the two key issues that has divided the Democratic caucus.
The agreement, in essence, would dissolve the public option in its present form and replace it with a hybrid system, whereby those 55 to 64 would be able to buy into the Medicare system (in essence, creating a "public option" for them, complete with the accompanying cost controls), while those 54 and under would be able to buy into a program that is managed by the government but provided by a private provider or private providers, similar to the government employees insurance program. It gives the public option liberals the 55 to 64 year old population on the public rolls and gives public option opponents the fact that no new government-run program is created.
The compromise is actually better in my eyes than the original legislation. The public option as originally designed in the Senate bill did little to curb costs as it would only allow the government to negotiate with providers, the same as any insurance company and would likely include only a pool of high-risk individuals, those who couldn't find a deal in the private market. The Medicare compromise allows the government to leverage its power to legislate compensation levels for people in the program and is a much more powerful carrier, since the program already contains basically everyone 65 and up. Providers could, as always refuse to treat people on Medicare, but rejecting providing care for all seniors is worlds different from rejecting providing care for a relatively smaller group of high-risk individuals. As has been the case with Medicare so far, I would guess most providers would play ball, which would mean favorable pricing and therefore cost containment. None of this helps the 54 and under crowd, but I'll take something over nothing.
But, the public option is not the only source of division in the Democratic caucus. The Senate also rejected the amendment offered by Senator Nelson this week that would have strengthened the prohibition of the inclusion of abortion coverage in the health care bill.
The bill, as presently written, prohibits use of government subsidies to pay for abortion coverage, but allows for abortion to be in the overall coverage schemes provided by private insurers, provided the portion of the coverage that covers abortion is funded through the out-of-pocket portion of the premium. In other words, if there is a $500/month health policy and the individual pays $100/month of that premium with the government picking up the rest of the tab, the policy could provide abortion coverage as long as the cost of that coverage is not more than $100/month. Nelson and other anti-abortion advocates (as well as some that favor abortion rights but are wary of funding abortions with federal dollars) object to the provision as currently written, since virtually all policies would have an individual contribution sufficient to fund abortion coverage, meaning that virtually all federally subsidized policies would be free to offer coverage for abortion services.
Senator Nelson's amendment would have expressly prohibited providing abortion coverage for subsidized policies. Essentially, it would require someone wanting abortion coverage to pay for a separate policy to insure abortions, although that could, theoretically come from the same company. It is very similar in language to the House amendment that Bart Stupak successfully pushed through in the House version of the bill. The senate rejected the amendment 54-45, with Republican Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe joining the majority of Democrats to defeat the amendment, which won the support of the remaining Republicans plus 7 Democrats.
Senator Nelson has said that he will not support the final bill with the abortion amendment, so assuming that Reid has agreement with all the Democrats on the public option, he will still need to win over either Nelson or one Republican (presumably Olympia Snowe) to carry the day and get his 60 votes.
Victory is in sight for Reid, but is still not assured. The Democrats would be wise to give ground on the abortion issue...it is unlikely that the bill could get back through the House without the provision anyway.
Which brings me to one more point...if the Democrats do get a bill through the Senate, why not vote on that bill in the House unamended and skip the conference committee process? Let me explain...ordinarily when the House and Senate pass differing versions of legislation, a conference committee from the two bodies melds the two bills into a final bill that is then revoted on by both houses. But that is not how it HAS to work. Given that any final bill would have to look essentially the same as the Senate bill, if one passes, why not just have the House adopt the Senate bill as is? It would shorten the process, dodge another tough fight in the Senate and get a bill to the President by year's end (assuming the Senate is able to move something by then, which is far from assured.)
The Senate is taking a break from health care for a few days while the CBO scores the Reid compromise. In the meantime, they are going to take up a truly awful example of:
Bad Government, Plain and Simple
I've written extensively on how fouled up the appropriations process has been this year and ever year in recent memory. It is the middle of December and the majority of agencies still don't have a budget for the fiscal year that started in October, but rather, have been operating on a series of continuing resolutions, which provide short-term extensions of last years budget into this year. So, basically, the departments have been operating tactically, unsure of what longer term projects will be approved and which will not. Not a great practice.
Enter the Minibus. A bill was shoved through the House this week by a 221-202 vote (all Republicans voting "no", joined by 28 Democrats) that would cover appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Commerce, Justice, Labor, Health and Human Services, Veterans Affairs and State in one fell swoop, leaving only the Department of Defense budget to be dealt with at a later date. The Senate will likely vote next week, before the present continuing resolution expires on December 18th.
So shouldn't I be happy that Congress is finally moving the ball on appropriations? Hell no! This massive bill was shoved through with almost no debate, with some of the departments not even having an initial bill that was debated in both houses of congress with an opportunity for amendment. The bill was voted on less than 24 hours after it was printed, leaving zero time for public examination of the legislation, which probably contains poor provisions and irresponsible earmarks that we may never even hear about until after it is law.
Yes, finally passing a budget is good. Doing it in the dark rather than in the sunlight is not. There are plenty of working days for congress to do its job before the fiscal year starts. This type of mess happens when they fail to show any type of discipline with the calendar. And one has to wonder if some members don't like it better this way....rammed through bills are easier to cram in pet provisions.
Democrats should be ashamed. Unfortunately, this issue is complex and mundane enough that it will likely garner little coverage or public outcry, as the whole budgeting process as failed to do, just like every year.
On the President, a Closely Divided Nation
It's obvious that they love President Obama in Europe still. The latest Nobel Peace Prize winner (nope, not going to rehash that debate) is a rock star overseas. He used to be a rockstar here. Now he seems all too human. On the question of whether the President is doing well, Americans are sharply divided, and getting closer and closer to even.
President Obama's aggregate approve minus disapprove numbers have tracked below his 7.2% November vote margin every day since November 29th, his first days below this benchmark threshold. This means that his coalition has shrunk since November. He has yet to have a day where his disapproves exceed his approves yet, but judging by the pattern, if he doesn't start getting some good news, it may be just a matter of time.
His monthly averages, with smooth out the bumps, show a decline of almost 4% from his November numbers to December, which would put him on track to have his worst month since August, when angry town halls and tea party protests dominated the news.
The Rest Is Still Unwritten...
The President's declining poll numbers bring me to my central thought about the Obama Presidency thus far...the road has not yet forked. What I mean by that is I can clearly imagine two distinct narratives being told at the mid-terms in November 2010. Here they are:
"A brutal night for the Democrats as the drag of unpopular President Barack Obama leads the Republicans to retake the House of Representatives and make significant inroads into the Democratic majority in the Senate. The President, who has been plagued by persistent double digit unemployment following his failed stimulus package as well as attacks on his ineffectiveness as a leader as he failed to get either health care reform or environmental legislation passed. His foreign policy is seen as an extension of the policy failures of the Bush administration as casualties mount in Afghanistan and Iraq slips back into civil unrest. Many Democrats are now wondering aloud how they elected a man of such little executive experience and what this will all mean for the future of the party."
or
"A discouraging night for Republicans as they not only fail to make inroads in the House, but lose key seats in the Senate with Democratic wins in Ohio and Missouri. Buoyed by a dropping unemployment rate and a victory on health care, the Democrats now hold the seats to pass legislation virtually at will. President Obama's popularity, at its height, is bolstered by the sense that he is the among the most accomplished first year Presidents in history, having passed not only the most sweeping Health Care reform policy since Lyndon Johnson, but having pulled the country out of the worst economic conditions since the Great Depression, as unemployment falls below 8%. President Obama is also bolstered by strong international support for his policies, which have ended the Iraq war while stabilizing Afghanistan and driving the Taliban into hiding."
Which narrative will we tell? Probably somewhere in between. The point is, we don't really know yet whether the President will get his way on key legislation or whether what he has done on the economy and in the foreign policy arena will work. But the stakes for the performance of the economy, the success of the President's Afghanistan strategy and the fate of Health Care legislation are immense. And not just for the Democrats.
If you like this site, tell your friends.
Friday, November 27, 2009
The Tough Road Ahead for President Obama
It is going to be a trying few months for the President. Consider:
(1) He is about to announce an Afghanistan strategy that will infuriate his own party. Liberals will be outraged that we are sending more troops to Afghanistan, while Conservatives will be likely only lukewarm in their support, feeling that he should have reached this conclusion earlier.
(2) He needs every last one of those members of his own party to pass health care reform legislation in the Senate. He also needs to convince moderates like Sen. Blanche Lincoln (AR) to vote with him, possibly at the expense of her own job.
(3) While unemployment appears to be stabilizing (at least from the latest unemployment benefit numbers), it is stabilizing at a very high level, with pretty low prospects for it being recovered in time for November.
(4) His third domestic priority, environmental legislation took a huge blow when hacked e-mails from major scientists appeared to reveal a conspiracy to squash anti-global warming scientific evidence. The perception is horrible, regardless of the scientific reality.
(5) His approval in many polls has dipped below the "magic" (in the eyes of the media, not myself) 50% threshold, although his approve minus disapprove remains positive.
(6) The Secret Service is apparently too inept to keep uninvited guests out of his parties -- not a comforting thought if you are the first black US President who sees death threats posted on the internet daily.
(7) Everybody still hates Tim Geithner
(8) You can't seem to stop committing gaffes on foreign soil (bow and handshake, ipods to the Queen of England, etc.) -- and we all know the media would much rather talk about that than substance
A tough road indeed. Poll numbers updated next post (still painfully recreating my poll database from scratch).
If you like this site, tell your friends.
(1) He is about to announce an Afghanistan strategy that will infuriate his own party. Liberals will be outraged that we are sending more troops to Afghanistan, while Conservatives will be likely only lukewarm in their support, feeling that he should have reached this conclusion earlier.
(2) He needs every last one of those members of his own party to pass health care reform legislation in the Senate. He also needs to convince moderates like Sen. Blanche Lincoln (AR) to vote with him, possibly at the expense of her own job.
(3) While unemployment appears to be stabilizing (at least from the latest unemployment benefit numbers), it is stabilizing at a very high level, with pretty low prospects for it being recovered in time for November.
(4) His third domestic priority, environmental legislation took a huge blow when hacked e-mails from major scientists appeared to reveal a conspiracy to squash anti-global warming scientific evidence. The perception is horrible, regardless of the scientific reality.
(5) His approval in many polls has dipped below the "magic" (in the eyes of the media, not myself) 50% threshold, although his approve minus disapprove remains positive.
(6) The Secret Service is apparently too inept to keep uninvited guests out of his parties -- not a comforting thought if you are the first black US President who sees death threats posted on the internet daily.
(7) Everybody still hates Tim Geithner
(8) You can't seem to stop committing gaffes on foreign soil (bow and handshake, ipods to the Queen of England, etc.) -- and we all know the media would much rather talk about that than substance
A tough road indeed. Poll numbers updated next post (still painfully recreating my poll database from scratch).
If you like this site, tell your friends.
Saturday, August 1, 2009
Reflections from Down Under, President Obama -- Happy to See July End
Back from Australia
I made the long return trip from Australia last night (actually over about 30 hours prior to Friday night.) It was primarily a business trip, but I can't go two weeks without discussing politics, so I thought I'd share some observations:
* Australia is about the most pro-American country on the globe...they like us, but definitely like Obama better than Bush.
* Australia has a model private/public health insurance model -- a basic policy that is publicly funded and more generous private policies. Everyone there seems to love their model and can't understand why we can't do something similar.
* The Aussie economy is in great shape relative to the globe's. This appears to be in large measure to their lack of globalization -- your Aussie souvenir T-shirts are made in Australia as are the rental cars you drive.
* I need to go back when I can be a tourist -- the wildlife and culture are amazing there
President Obama's Awful Month of July
In my opinion, July has been by far the worst month of President Obama's term so far. His poll numbers show declines and with good reason. In July, we saw health care reform stall in both houses of congress, the June unemployment report show a 25-year high 9.5% unemployment and the stimulus bill coming under fire. Then, the normally buttoned-up and polished President stepped deep into the dog doo with the "acted stupidly" remark. All-in-all, not so good.
In the long view, it wasn't a total disaster. Sonia Sotomayor is still a lock for confirmation, with 7 GOP senators already announcing support and no Dems dissenting at this point, the stimulus is starting to get rolling at a faster pace and the prospects for economic improvement are getting better.
But lower poll numbers definitely mean less political capital and the President is going to need a lot of that to get health care and energy policy implemented. Prospects look tough, but not completely zero with control of both houses of congress still firmly in the hands of a Democratic party, although the Blue Dogs still don't appear aligned with the leadership on these issues.
The latest tracking of our composite of non-partisan polls is below:
At 15.5% overall approve-disapprove, President Obama is at the lowest mark of his Presidency, but still ahead of his 7.2% margin in last November's election. A breakdown by poll type is below:
Adult Americans: +19%
Registered Voters: +16%
Likely Voters: +7%
According to the likely voter polling, if an election were held today, it would look a lot like it did last November. For the first time in this administration, we have more than 1 likely voter poll. The Rasmussen Poll had been the only LV poll available and it had consistently shown far lower numbers than the others (it shows Obama at +1% today.) Now we have polls from GWU/Battleground and NPR that both show Obama at +11%, which indicates to me that there are either sample problems with the Rasmussen poll, or with everyone else. All the more reason to use aggregate numbers that average out the disparate methodologies.
President Obama's by-month numbers look as follows:
President Obama finished July with a +19.5% average, his lowest number yet (each successive month has been lower than the last so far.) July's drop, at 7.4%, is his second-largest drop, with an 8.4% decline in March being the largest. But March was while the "first 100 days" shine was still coming off. We are into a more steady-state now and losing 7.4% is a bad, bad month. A couple more like this and we will be talking about an unpopular President.
Policy Updates
(1) Economic Stimulus
As of this week's release:
Authorized: $191.9 billion (38.5%)
Spent: $70.2 billion (14.1%)
This puts average weekly spending since the stimulus bill was signed February 17th at just under $3 billion. At this pace, it would take over 3 years to exhaust the stimulus. Clearly, the pace needs to pick-up. I still believe the benchmark is 40% spent by year-end. We appear to be behind schedule to hit that mark. Benchmark Transportation spending has crossed $900 million (I'm sure you've seen some signs about projects funded by the act, as I have), but is still behind where it will need to be to create a number of jobs that will have a real impact.
The legislative part of this is done, this is about executive execution. Let's get moving, cabinet heads!
(2) Energy Policy / Cap and Trade
Still stalled in the Senate. No vote scheduled.
(3) Healthcare
Moved beyond the August recess. Just barely passed out of the House committee and both houses of congress appear poised to debate the issue in September. It appears that there is some hope for a fragile majority in both houses, which could provide for a narrow passage if Democrats employ reconciliation to stifle a fillibuster attempt in the Senate. Blue Dogs in the House and moderates like Ben Nelson (D-NE) hold the keys in the Senate.
Upcoming....Some Actual Election Predictions
Congress is headed to recess, so in my next blog, I'll take a look at the latest numbers for the 2010 mid-terms as well as the far-out hypotheticals in 2012.
Thanks for bearing with me during my long trip out of town and thanks as always for reading.
I made the long return trip from Australia last night (actually over about 30 hours prior to Friday night.) It was primarily a business trip, but I can't go two weeks without discussing politics, so I thought I'd share some observations:
* Australia is about the most pro-American country on the globe...they like us, but definitely like Obama better than Bush.
* Australia has a model private/public health insurance model -- a basic policy that is publicly funded and more generous private policies. Everyone there seems to love their model and can't understand why we can't do something similar.
* The Aussie economy is in great shape relative to the globe's. This appears to be in large measure to their lack of globalization -- your Aussie souvenir T-shirts are made in Australia as are the rental cars you drive.
* I need to go back when I can be a tourist -- the wildlife and culture are amazing there
President Obama's Awful Month of July
In my opinion, July has been by far the worst month of President Obama's term so far. His poll numbers show declines and with good reason. In July, we saw health care reform stall in both houses of congress, the June unemployment report show a 25-year high 9.5% unemployment and the stimulus bill coming under fire. Then, the normally buttoned-up and polished President stepped deep into the dog doo with the "acted stupidly" remark. All-in-all, not so good.
In the long view, it wasn't a total disaster. Sonia Sotomayor is still a lock for confirmation, with 7 GOP senators already announcing support and no Dems dissenting at this point, the stimulus is starting to get rolling at a faster pace and the prospects for economic improvement are getting better.
But lower poll numbers definitely mean less political capital and the President is going to need a lot of that to get health care and energy policy implemented. Prospects look tough, but not completely zero with control of both houses of congress still firmly in the hands of a Democratic party, although the Blue Dogs still don't appear aligned with the leadership on these issues.
The latest tracking of our composite of non-partisan polls is below:
At 15.5% overall approve-disapprove, President Obama is at the lowest mark of his Presidency, but still ahead of his 7.2% margin in last November's election. A breakdown by poll type is below:Adult Americans: +19%
Registered Voters: +16%
Likely Voters: +7%
According to the likely voter polling, if an election were held today, it would look a lot like it did last November. For the first time in this administration, we have more than 1 likely voter poll. The Rasmussen Poll had been the only LV poll available and it had consistently shown far lower numbers than the others (it shows Obama at +1% today.) Now we have polls from GWU/Battleground and NPR that both show Obama at +11%, which indicates to me that there are either sample problems with the Rasmussen poll, or with everyone else. All the more reason to use aggregate numbers that average out the disparate methodologies.
President Obama's by-month numbers look as follows:
President Obama finished July with a +19.5% average, his lowest number yet (each successive month has been lower than the last so far.) July's drop, at 7.4%, is his second-largest drop, with an 8.4% decline in March being the largest. But March was while the "first 100 days" shine was still coming off. We are into a more steady-state now and losing 7.4% is a bad, bad month. A couple more like this and we will be talking about an unpopular President.Policy Updates
(1) Economic Stimulus
As of this week's release:
Authorized: $191.9 billion (38.5%)
Spent: $70.2 billion (14.1%)
This puts average weekly spending since the stimulus bill was signed February 17th at just under $3 billion. At this pace, it would take over 3 years to exhaust the stimulus. Clearly, the pace needs to pick-up. I still believe the benchmark is 40% spent by year-end. We appear to be behind schedule to hit that mark. Benchmark Transportation spending has crossed $900 million (I'm sure you've seen some signs about projects funded by the act, as I have), but is still behind where it will need to be to create a number of jobs that will have a real impact.
The legislative part of this is done, this is about executive execution. Let's get moving, cabinet heads!
(2) Energy Policy / Cap and Trade
Still stalled in the Senate. No vote scheduled.
(3) Healthcare
Moved beyond the August recess. Just barely passed out of the House committee and both houses of congress appear poised to debate the issue in September. It appears that there is some hope for a fragile majority in both houses, which could provide for a narrow passage if Democrats employ reconciliation to stifle a fillibuster attempt in the Senate. Blue Dogs in the House and moderates like Ben Nelson (D-NE) hold the keys in the Senate.
Upcoming....Some Actual Election Predictions
Congress is headed to recess, so in my next blog, I'll take a look at the latest numbers for the 2010 mid-terms as well as the far-out hypotheticals in 2012.
Thanks for bearing with me during my long trip out of town and thanks as always for reading.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Barack Obama, A Presidency in Trouble?
Barack Obama has been President of the United States for 182 days or roughly one eighth of his elected term. In the past couple of weeks an increasing theme has emerged, first in the conservative blogosphere and more recently in the main stream media -- is the President on the ropes?
Boy, a lot changes quickly in politics. Six months ago, as the President was sworn into office before huge, adoring crowds it felt like he could do no wrong. Sure, Rush Limbaugh hoped he would fail, but we expect as much from Rush. As for the vast majority of us -- all the Democrats, most of the independents and at least half the Republicans, we all wanted him to do well. We believed he might really be that special, different kind of politican that could change to tone in Washington. What a long time ago that seems like.
So what is the health of the Presidency of Barack Obama? Let's do a run down.
I. The Agenda
Coming into office, President Obama made his policy priorities crystal clear. There were a lot of promises (more on that later) but only 3 clear priorities: Economic Stimulus, Energy Policy and Universal Healthcare.
Let's look at where he stands on each:
a. Economic Stimulus
What He Sought: A large ($700-$800 billion) stimulus package that would pass with a fair amount of Republican support (his stated goal was 80 votes in the Senate) that would stabilize the economy and hold the line on unemployment at 8%.
What He Got: A large ($787 billion) stimulus package, passed in a highly partisan manner (a highly partisan index score of 0.94) that has failed to stop unemployment from rising to 9.5%.
My Analysis:
That the President got such a large bill through congress so quickly was an impressive feat. The way the bill was designed (with the spending spread over 2+ years), the practical fact is that it is impossible to judge the effectiveness of the bill at this juncture. What the President does have is a PR nightmare, partly self-inflicted. Stating a concrete goal of holding unemployment to 8% while in a turbulent, unpredictable economic situation was a huge tactical error. The structure of the bill (funding primarily flows through state governments and private enterprise), while it may have made the bill politically palatable to some makes the PR all the harder. FDR could point to a concrete 4.5 million people who were being employed by the Feds on infrastructure programs. Obama has to rely on vague economic theory about how many jobs were created.
The Verdict: Too soon to tell. If unemployment begins falling, Republican arguments that the stimulus isn't helping will be academic -- people will consider it a success. If unemployment keeps rising, expect the drum beat to get louder and some vulnerable Democrats to start jumping ship from the Obamaonomics wagon.
b. Energy Policy
What He Sought: A broad-based reform of energy policy that includes increased fuel economy standards, higher standards for renewable energy, higher standards for building energy efficiency, and, most critically, a cap-and-trade system on carbon emissions.
What He Got: Fuel efficiency standards -- done. The rest of his goals are addressed 100% by the climate change bill that very narrowly passed the house. Senate prospects remain very much in doubt.
My Analysis:
President Obama has laid out an ambitious agenda. A liberal bent to the House, some compromises on carbon credits to coal-users and some political strong-arming got the bill through the lower body of congress. The Senate is almost sure to weaken provisions in the bill and it may be a battle to get any sort of meaningful legislation fail.
The Verdict: Of Obama's 3 central agenda items, this is the one on which he can most afford to fail. He made it a central theme, but does anybody seriously think that if the economy recovers and people get universal healthcare that any significant number of swing voters will care that we didn't do cap and trade? Prospects are probably 50/50 that the President gets a meaningful law ot sign.
c. Universal Healthcare
What He Sought: A bill that creates universal access to affordable health care for all Americans.
What He Got: An expansion of the SCHIP program from 7 million to 11 million kids. Other than that, not a significant bill through either house of congress.
My Analysis:
Odds on this look long. Blue Dog Democrats are demanding serious changes to legislation in the House. The Senate looks even more divided. The ONLY way I can see a bill getting to the President's desk this year is by giving serious ground -- giving up on the "public option" in favor of subsidized exchanges. Limiting government aid to the more needy. Relaxing the rules on "play or pay" to exclude more small businesses. These are painful sacrifices for a guy who once supported single-payer health care. But it is this or no bill, in my opinion. And the President needs to get off the sidelines and start leading on this one.
The Verdict: As I've often noted, President Clinton survived failing on this issue. I'm not sure President Obama will. With Democrats firmly in control of both Houses of congress, if we can't get Health Care Reform done, we might as well have Republicans.
II. Public Approval
The President is not the PR dynamo that he once was, but all is not lost. The Gallup Approval numbers (the ones that I always use for comparability to previous Presidents due to the wealth of available data) peg him at 60% approval for today and an average of 59% for the past week of data. This puts him right about average for Post-World War II Presidents. Not exactly a home run, but not an overt failure either. It means he doesn't have the political capital to strong-arm things through a reluctant congress, but it also doesn't make his agenda poision, the way President Bush's was late in his second term.
III. The Promises
Politifact.com has documented 515 promises that President Obama made on the campaign trail. Of these, it rates that he has fulfilled 32 of them, compromised on 10 of them (partially fulfilled them) and broken 7 of them. This is a decent batting average on the one she has dealt with so far -- if we give 1 point for a kept promise, half a point for a compromise and zero points for a broken promise, the President is batting 76% on the promises he has dealt with.
But he has only dealt with 9.5% of them. Sure his term is only 12.5% in, but he is falling behind. A promise not acted on in his term equals a promise broken at the end of the day.
We didn't have politifact.com for past Presidents, so it's hard to set a benchmark, but I'd say that 50% kept is a pretty good standard from what I have seen of past Presidents. The President has a lot of ground to cover on a lot of issues to even meet that, relatively unambitious-sounding mark.
The good news? Politifact shows 78 promises as "in the works", meaning that the President is pushing for action on them. If fulfilled, these represent over 15% of his total promises.
Conclusions
So is the Obama Presidency in crisis? No. But he isn't the messiah either. The next 4 months will be fairly criticial to my assessment of the President's success. Two questions more than any will define his success or failure:
(1) Will he find a way to get a health care bill through?
(2) Will economic growth return and unemploymetn start to fall?
If the answer winds up being yes to both, the President may well be bulletproof for years to come. If the answer winds up no, watch out for a dramatic swing in power in 2010.
Stay tuned. If you like this site, tell your friends.
Boy, a lot changes quickly in politics. Six months ago, as the President was sworn into office before huge, adoring crowds it felt like he could do no wrong. Sure, Rush Limbaugh hoped he would fail, but we expect as much from Rush. As for the vast majority of us -- all the Democrats, most of the independents and at least half the Republicans, we all wanted him to do well. We believed he might really be that special, different kind of politican that could change to tone in Washington. What a long time ago that seems like.
So what is the health of the Presidency of Barack Obama? Let's do a run down.
I. The Agenda
Coming into office, President Obama made his policy priorities crystal clear. There were a lot of promises (more on that later) but only 3 clear priorities: Economic Stimulus, Energy Policy and Universal Healthcare.
Let's look at where he stands on each:
a. Economic Stimulus
What He Sought: A large ($700-$800 billion) stimulus package that would pass with a fair amount of Republican support (his stated goal was 80 votes in the Senate) that would stabilize the economy and hold the line on unemployment at 8%.
What He Got: A large ($787 billion) stimulus package, passed in a highly partisan manner (a highly partisan index score of 0.94) that has failed to stop unemployment from rising to 9.5%.
My Analysis:
That the President got such a large bill through congress so quickly was an impressive feat. The way the bill was designed (with the spending spread over 2+ years), the practical fact is that it is impossible to judge the effectiveness of the bill at this juncture. What the President does have is a PR nightmare, partly self-inflicted. Stating a concrete goal of holding unemployment to 8% while in a turbulent, unpredictable economic situation was a huge tactical error. The structure of the bill (funding primarily flows through state governments and private enterprise), while it may have made the bill politically palatable to some makes the PR all the harder. FDR could point to a concrete 4.5 million people who were being employed by the Feds on infrastructure programs. Obama has to rely on vague economic theory about how many jobs were created.
The Verdict: Too soon to tell. If unemployment begins falling, Republican arguments that the stimulus isn't helping will be academic -- people will consider it a success. If unemployment keeps rising, expect the drum beat to get louder and some vulnerable Democrats to start jumping ship from the Obamaonomics wagon.
b. Energy Policy
What He Sought: A broad-based reform of energy policy that includes increased fuel economy standards, higher standards for renewable energy, higher standards for building energy efficiency, and, most critically, a cap-and-trade system on carbon emissions.
What He Got: Fuel efficiency standards -- done. The rest of his goals are addressed 100% by the climate change bill that very narrowly passed the house. Senate prospects remain very much in doubt.
My Analysis:
President Obama has laid out an ambitious agenda. A liberal bent to the House, some compromises on carbon credits to coal-users and some political strong-arming got the bill through the lower body of congress. The Senate is almost sure to weaken provisions in the bill and it may be a battle to get any sort of meaningful legislation fail.
The Verdict: Of Obama's 3 central agenda items, this is the one on which he can most afford to fail. He made it a central theme, but does anybody seriously think that if the economy recovers and people get universal healthcare that any significant number of swing voters will care that we didn't do cap and trade? Prospects are probably 50/50 that the President gets a meaningful law ot sign.
c. Universal Healthcare
What He Sought: A bill that creates universal access to affordable health care for all Americans.
What He Got: An expansion of the SCHIP program from 7 million to 11 million kids. Other than that, not a significant bill through either house of congress.
My Analysis:
Odds on this look long. Blue Dog Democrats are demanding serious changes to legislation in the House. The Senate looks even more divided. The ONLY way I can see a bill getting to the President's desk this year is by giving serious ground -- giving up on the "public option" in favor of subsidized exchanges. Limiting government aid to the more needy. Relaxing the rules on "play or pay" to exclude more small businesses. These are painful sacrifices for a guy who once supported single-payer health care. But it is this or no bill, in my opinion. And the President needs to get off the sidelines and start leading on this one.
The Verdict: As I've often noted, President Clinton survived failing on this issue. I'm not sure President Obama will. With Democrats firmly in control of both Houses of congress, if we can't get Health Care Reform done, we might as well have Republicans.
II. Public Approval
The President is not the PR dynamo that he once was, but all is not lost. The Gallup Approval numbers (the ones that I always use for comparability to previous Presidents due to the wealth of available data) peg him at 60% approval for today and an average of 59% for the past week of data. This puts him right about average for Post-World War II Presidents. Not exactly a home run, but not an overt failure either. It means he doesn't have the political capital to strong-arm things through a reluctant congress, but it also doesn't make his agenda poision, the way President Bush's was late in his second term.
III. The Promises
Politifact.com has documented 515 promises that President Obama made on the campaign trail. Of these, it rates that he has fulfilled 32 of them, compromised on 10 of them (partially fulfilled them) and broken 7 of them. This is a decent batting average on the one she has dealt with so far -- if we give 1 point for a kept promise, half a point for a compromise and zero points for a broken promise, the President is batting 76% on the promises he has dealt with.
But he has only dealt with 9.5% of them. Sure his term is only 12.5% in, but he is falling behind. A promise not acted on in his term equals a promise broken at the end of the day.
We didn't have politifact.com for past Presidents, so it's hard to set a benchmark, but I'd say that 50% kept is a pretty good standard from what I have seen of past Presidents. The President has a lot of ground to cover on a lot of issues to even meet that, relatively unambitious-sounding mark.
The good news? Politifact shows 78 promises as "in the works", meaning that the President is pushing for action on them. If fulfilled, these represent over 15% of his total promises.
Conclusions
So is the Obama Presidency in crisis? No. But he isn't the messiah either. The next 4 months will be fairly criticial to my assessment of the President's success. Two questions more than any will define his success or failure:
(1) Will he find a way to get a health care bill through?
(2) Will economic growth return and unemploymetn start to fall?
If the answer winds up being yes to both, the President may well be bulletproof for years to come. If the answer winds up no, watch out for a dramatic swing in power in 2010.
Stay tuned. If you like this site, tell your friends.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
