Political Physics: Is Obama Flunking Post-Partisanship 101?
.
a blogumn by Monique King-Viehland
Over the last few weeks, I have found myself in several debates with friends and colleagues about what Obama means when he says that he is going to attempt to run his White House in a “post-partisan” fashion. If you listen to some members of Congress, both Democrats and Republicans, “post-partisan” is directly equivalent to Obama’s ability to drum up support for his economic stimulus bill. And if that is the measure, then judging by the Republican response in the House, his grade so far is an “F.”
During the presidential campaign, Obama presented himself as a “post-partisan” figure. He promised to bridge barriers — not just barriers of race and culture, but also ideology and party. It wasn’t exactly clear then what Obama’s postpartisanship would mean in practice, but a picture is now emerging.
Obama spent an entire day on Capitol Hill discussing his proposed economic stimulus bill with Senate and House Republicans. Yet, not a single House Republican voted in favor of the bill.
And according to the American Enterprise Institute’s Norman Ornstein, who has spent his career analyzing the corrosive effects of partisanship in
Washington, the promise of “post-partisanship,” is nothing new and failure is not surprising. “There was Richard Nixon, whose slogan was ‘bring us together.’ Gerald Ford promised an era of ‘compromise, conciliation and cooperation.’ George H.W. Bush was ‘kinder and gentler,’ and George W. Bush wanted to ‘change the tone.’ But nothing really changed in Washington.”
Today as Senate began consideration of the economic recovery legislation, Republicans are renewing their opposition to the legislation in its current form.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell made it very clear that Republicans believe several changes are needed. McConnell said, “We look forward to offering amendments to improve this critical legislation and move it back to the package President Obama originally proposed – 40 percent tax relief, no wasteful spending and a bipartisan approach.”
Clearly, the economic stimulus bill as it currently stands faces significant opposition in the Senate and Obama may not get the bipartisan support that he had hoped for.
So, is Obama already failing at being “post-partisan?”
I think it depends on how you measure success.
According to a recent Gallup Poll, Americans are relatively happy with the first round of decisions Obama has made in his short two-week tenure as President. “While the public has not supported everything Obama has done in his presidency thus far, he continues to receive strong overall job approval ratings around 66%.” Now to put that into historical context: that 66% approval rating ranks Obama near the top of the list of presidents elected after World War II. In fact, only JFK at 72% in 1961 had a higher initial approval rating.
Now like most marriages in the first year, Obama is benefitting from that “honeymoon” period, however the numbers still tell a story about the popularity of this President particularly across party lines. Even across party lines – Obama has a 88% approval rating among Democrats, 62% approval rating among Independents and 43% approval rating among Republicans – America seems to be giving their President a “thumbs up!”
So does Obama get a passing grade when it comes to “post-partisanship?”
I think it is still too early to tell.
Will he get the Republican support for his economic stimulus bill that he had hoped for?
Probably not.
But the real question is, with a President whose overall approval rating is 66% and 43% among Republicans, who will that hurt more – Obama or the Republican Party?
.
I think post-partisanship is a myth. If you could truly be post-partisan, there would be no need for political parties at all (insert debate that we're already basically one giant party here). I don't agree with a lot of the ideas in Obama's stimulus package and I'm glad the Republicans are challenging it. That's the whole purpose behind a multi-party system. Political debate is what makes things better. It may slow things down, but I think it usually makes things better. So I don't think, in that sense, you'll ever be able to declare Washington post-partisan.
I do commend Obama on selecting Republicans to serve in his cabinet, like today's nomination of Judd Gregg as Secretary of Commerce. That reaching out to the other side is what will help keep his approval rating amongst Republicans relatively high. I just hope it isn't an empty gesture.
I think post-partisanship is a myth. If you could truly be post-partisan, there would be no need for political parties at all (insert debate that we're already basically one giant party here). I don't agree with a lot of the ideas in Obama's stimulus package and I'm glad the Republicans are challenging it. That's the whole purpose behind a multi-party system. Political debate is what makes things better. It may slow things down, but I think it usually makes things better. So I don't think, in that sense, you'll ever be able to declare Washington post-partisan.
I do commend Obama on selecting Republicans to serve in his cabinet, like today's nomination of Judd Gregg as Secretary of Commerce. That reaching out to the other side is what will help keep his approval rating amongst Republicans relatively high. I just hope it isn't an empty gesture.
I agree with Debra in that I think we should always have more than one party. I just don't think the system works when it's being run without any opposition whatsoever. However, I'm suspicious about party members on both sides voting their party lines as opposed to what's best for their districts or states. Also, neither side is offering up good solutions for oversight as far as I'm concerned.
I agree with Debra in that I think we should always have more than one party. I just don't think the system works when it's being run without any opposition whatsoever. However, I'm suspicious about party members on both sides voting their party lines as opposed to what's best for their districts or states. Also, neither side is offering up good solutions for oversight as far as I'm concerned.
Even if he doesn't get the Republicans to move his gestures keep the American people on his side. The more the Republicans refuse to compromise the worse they look.
Even if he doesn't get the Republicans to move his gestures keep the American people on his side. The more the Republicans refuse to compromise the worse they look.
I agree. I think it's too early to tell. It would seem to me, given the problems facing the country, in order to get something accomplished both parties will have to work together…. or it won't be good for any of us.
I agree. I think it's too early to tell. It would seem to me, given the problems facing the country, in order to get something accomplished both parties will have to work together…. or it won't be good for any of us.