Unsurprisingly, I don’t agree with Peter Beinart on many details, but I agree with this:
One can argue about whether the bill the Senate passed will truly change the way Wall Street operates, but off the top of your head, can you name a more significant piece of progressive legislation signed by either of the last two Democratic presidents? Neither can I. And that goes for Obama’s stimulus package and his health-care reform as well. All of which means that, legislatively at least, Obama has exceeded in 18 months what Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter achieved in a combined 12 years. By summer’s end, he’ll also have shepherded two young liberal justices on to the Supreme Court.
Even as Republicans claim political momentum, the country is in the midst of a major shift leftward when it comes to the role of government.Even on the foreign-policy front, Obama has been meeting with success. He’s gotten Beijing to revalue its currency, which has been a goal of America’s China policy hands for several administrations now. He’s gotten China and Russia to back new United Nations sanctions against Iran, and he’s dramatically improved relations between Washington and Moscow, drawing Russia closer to the West and further from China, which once looked like its emerging strategic partner.
If anything, Beinart is underselling Obama’s foreign policy successes by not explicitly mentioning the agreement with Russia over the START treaty. And he’s right that the Wall Street Reforms alone surpass anything Carter or Clinton were able to do domestically. Clinton’s greatest domestic achievement was made in his first year. The Family and Medical Leave Act was Clinton’s best gift to the American people, but he mainly tinkered around the edges after that, and he, of course, set the stage for the economic meltdown with his deregulation of the banks.
Here’s where I differ from Beinart.
But even if Obama never manages another legislative victory, he’ll already have pulled off one of the most impressive opening acts in American political history. The question is why we’re paying so little attention.
The answer is that the media views policy through the lens of politics. Unless a policy victory brings political benefits—rising poll numbers, better prospects for the next elections—it is not treated as a big win. Thus, the Tea Party movement is considered an ominous sign for Obama, evidence that the country is turning against him. But the reason that the Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin crowd is so angry is that Obama has expanded the federal government’s relationship with the private sector in fundamental ways. In political terms, the Tea Party movement may be a sign of Obama’s weakened position, but in policy terms, it is a testament to his success.
I don’t think the problem is that the media is looking too much at poll numbers, nor do I think the Tea Party is evidence of Obama’s success. That’s not the problem. The Tea Party first emerged in the fall of 2008 in the form of Sarah Palin rallies. Prior to that, the Tea Party phenomenon was restricted to Ron Paul’s well-funded but poorly executed presidential campaign. As PUMAs emerged on the left, grizzlies emerged on the right, and Paul’s people came into the mix to create a toxic brew of racial and gender resentment mixed with libertarian economics and fringe paranoid conspiracy theories. This movement was in full force by inauguration day and hasn’t been much influenced by Obama’s successes or failures.
As for the media, they are driven by controversy. So, they’re simply more interested in airing the views of Republicans who disagree with the president’s policies and Democrats who are unhappy, than they are in spelling out the scope of Obama’s achievements. That’s not really that much of a problem because it’s not the media’s job to be a cheerleader for the government. They could be fairer and they could do better than this:
• ABC, This Week: Sen. John McCain (R-AZ).
• CBS, Face The Nation: Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC).
• CNN, State Of The Union: Afghan Ambassador to the United States Said Tayeb Jawab, Rep. John Boccieri (D-OH), Rep. Duncan D. Hunter (R-CA), Rep. Mike Coffman (R-CO).
• Fox News Sunday: Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), Kenneth Feinberg, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC).
• NBC, Meet The Press: Will not air, due to coverage of Wimbledon.
But, the administration doesn’t actually have a problem getting their message out through the media. The biggest problem for the administration is that once again the left is feeding on itself, unhappy with anything, and unwilling to give credit where it is due. The Republicans are causing immense frustration, and that frustration is getting aimed back at the administration because they’re the ones in charge and their the ones who have to make compromises on their promises to get anything done. It’d be nice if the Tea Partiers went away, or the Republicans developed schisms, or if the media were less biased. But it would also be nice if the left could ever overcome their habit of devouring their own. In the short-term, none of these things are going to happen though.
So, get ready for a beatdown in November. Still…each individual has the choice to be positive or negative, constructive or cynical. It’s all up to you.
