Mandate for this
Responding to David Kurtz' post this morning:
A mandate is what you make of it. The extent to which Obama has a mandate will be shaped not only by the size of his (knock on wood) victory but also by his actions and decisions during the transition and immediately upon taking office. As well as by the speed with which he converts his campaign volunteers, donors and supporters into a grassroots force for legislative action.
Based upon everything we've seen of his campaign and his consistent adherence to the big picture view, I have every confidence he will maximize the opportunities before him and ensure that there is a full mandate for action.
With regard to the question of a mandate for what:
Obama has been crystal clear about where he stands and what his priorities are. He has already created a road map for governing. Obviously the economic meltdown becomes priority #1 but many of his proposals already fit within that prism.
So at the top of the agenda is likely to be a mix of his middle-class tax cuts, another economic stimulus (unless Congress does this in a lame duck session), major investments in infrastructure, and his Apollo-style green energy investment initiative. You should also expect to see changes in how the Treasury Department's bailout is implemented with stronger quid pro quos on businesses receiving assistance and more of an emphasis on helping struggling homeowners.
Along with this should be swift passage of the Employee Free Choice Act (if we can muster 60 Senate votes) as a key element in empowering workers to raise their living standards after eight years of falling behind in good times and bad.
Health care reform will have to be on a longer timeline (hopefully within 6-12 months), but this is as much a part of Obama's mandate as anything.
On a slightly longer timeline perhaps, but also critical, will be enactment of a cap-and-trade regime to fight global warming and reduce our dependence on foreign oil in the process.
While all this is going on, the timeline for withdrawal from Iraq should be cemented and the troop drawdown should be underway.
Above all, I think we'll see Obama restoring Americans' confidence not only in the presidency but in the power of government to improve their lives. We'll see him adopting a mantle of reassuring, inspirational leadership comparable to what FDR did in 1933. And we'll see a style of governing that treats the American people as intelligent adults, not mindless, malleable, fearful children. That's part of Obama's mandate, too, and one I am quite sure he will seize.
A mandate is what you make of it. The extent to which Obama has a mandate will be shaped not only by the size of his (knock on wood) victory but also by his actions and decisions during the transition and immediately upon taking office. As well as by the speed with which he converts his campaign volunteers, donors and supporters into a grassroots force for legislative action.
Based upon everything we've seen of his campaign and his consistent adherence to the big picture view, I have every confidence he will maximize the opportunities before him and ensure that there is a full mandate for action.
With regard to the question of a mandate for what:
Obama has been crystal clear about where he stands and what his priorities are. He has already created a road map for governing. Obviously the economic meltdown becomes priority #1 but many of his proposals already fit within that prism.
So at the top of the agenda is likely to be a mix of his middle-class tax cuts, another economic stimulus (unless Congress does this in a lame duck session), major investments in infrastructure, and his Apollo-style green energy investment initiative. You should also expect to see changes in how the Treasury Department's bailout is implemented with stronger quid pro quos on businesses receiving assistance and more of an emphasis on helping struggling homeowners.
Along with this should be swift passage of the Employee Free Choice Act (if we can muster 60 Senate votes) as a key element in empowering workers to raise their living standards after eight years of falling behind in good times and bad.
Health care reform will have to be on a longer timeline (hopefully within 6-12 months), but this is as much a part of Obama's mandate as anything.
On a slightly longer timeline perhaps, but also critical, will be enactment of a cap-and-trade regime to fight global warming and reduce our dependence on foreign oil in the process.
While all this is going on, the timeline for withdrawal from Iraq should be cemented and the troop drawdown should be underway.
Above all, I think we'll see Obama restoring Americans' confidence not only in the presidency but in the power of government to improve their lives. We'll see him adopting a mantle of reassuring, inspirational leadership comparable to what FDR did in 1933. And we'll see a style of governing that treats the American people as intelligent adults, not mindless, malleable, fearful children. That's part of Obama's mandate, too, and one I am quite sure he will seize.
Advertisement
If Obama should win in a landslide, wouldn't the mandate allow Pres. Obama and Congressional Democrats to put forth actual workable policies without Republican ideological input that waters them down into 50% useless programs that benefit the wrong targets? Think about the recent Medicare reform.
A fair number of citizens and almost all of the medical professionals that want healthcare reform point to single payer as the most effective and efficient program to institute. Without a mandate, reform would have to be incremental and less encompassing, like the current Obama plan. But with a mandate, a truly good policy seems more likely to make it through the legislative process and come out in a recognizable, close to original proposal.
Bonus thought: With any luck a mandate will also disappear the term 'war on terror'.
October 30, 2008 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree, an Obama landslide -- and 61 Senate votes (so no one needs Lieberman) -- would be ideal and lead to the best possible policy outcomes. But as Bush showed -- tragically -- a president can get most if not all of his agenda through even on a narrow margin (or in his case, finishing second in the popular vote). It's possible, of course, that the policies would be watered down as you note, but still better to get positive action than none at all. And I think Obama will deliver at least that much, though hopefully more.
October 30, 2008 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unfortunately, Dems only have until around June to have, at minimum, the PO in place for participation. This nonsense of a 2014 start date isn't going to resonate with voter in November.
February 8, 2010 7:32 PM | Reply | Permalink