Blog

Subscribe to RSS

Get our blog feed via e-mail

Posts Tagged ‘first 100 days’

Obama’s grade at 100? What about our grade?

Robert Borosage

Robert Borosage

By Robert L. Borosage
Co-Director
Campaign for America’s Future

Grading a president after 100 days always strikes me as presumptuous. The only real grade is an incomplete. And as good teachers will tell you, letter grades – as opposed to written evaluations – are inherently arbitrary and misleading.

One thing is clear. If we’re grading on a curve, Barack Obama ranks near the top, just below FDR. In changing course, getting bold things done, setting a tone, lifting our spirits and confidence, we haven’t seen anything like this since Roosevelt. Even Reagan, the great communicator, had a much harder time in his early days, starting with the limousine gridlock of his inaugural. He had to get shot to move his agenda.

Rather than just grading the president, I suggest we might profitably assess our own 100 days. Obama has stormed the national and world stages in his first weeks. But how have we done – particularly the progressives who have such a large stake in the success of this president – in relation to Obama? He has demonstrated remarkable mastery of the powers of the presidency to lead the country. Have we mastered the power of the citizenry to empower the president?

There is sophisticated organizing being done in support of Obama’s agenda. New organizations – most notably the 13 million person Obama for America – and old have joined together to mobilize citizens around the president’s key initiatives. Major groups with large memberships – from unions to MoveOn, community and citizen action networks — have coordinated target lists, messaging, and activities. Increasingly their attention is focused on herding Democrats, which will intensify as Sen. Arlen Specter’s decision to switch jerseys makes Republicans even less relevant.

Similarly, on core issues — health care reform, new energy, college affordability, immigration, empowering workers- large independent efforts are underway. The unions and other progressive groups are taking on the corporate lobby over the Employee Free Choice Act. Health Care for Americans Now leads a range of coalitions pushing health care reform. Environment and labor groups have been actively mobilizing around green jobs and new energy.

These independent efforts will help define the scope of the reforms, engage the public to support them, and strengthen the hand (or stiffen the spine) of Democrats in negotiations. Neither the public plan in health care nor cap and trade on carbon emissions will survive without popular mobilization.

For the most part, progressives have been happy to support and reluctant to question the popular president. So the fateful commitment of 60,000 troops to Afghanistan was made without much opposition, nothing like that Obama joined when it came to invading Iraq. Human rights advocates did push the administration to open up the shameful record on torture and are now demanding investigation and prosecution. Progressives helped convince the White House to shelve a proposed task force to “fix” Social Security which would have been bad policy and bad politics. Progressive economists – Krugman, Stiglitz – and journalists – Greider and Kuttner and more – have challenged the administration’s banking bailout, and pushed hard for a stronger recovery plan. The call for a full investigation of the mess – a Pecora Commission – has gained some momentum in both the Congress and the media.

But what Obama has been missing has been an independent, obstreporous citizens’ movement demanding fundamental reform. Roosevelt had the labor movement, the Townsend Clubs, Huey Long, socialists and communists challenging him from the left. Johnson had the civil rights movement forcing his hand.

This kind of opposition isn’t easy. No president likes to face disruption particularly from what he would consider his base. There are similar stories told about both Roosevelt and Johnson meeting with leaders of the movements and saying something to the effect of “I agree with you, now go out there and make me do it.” But in reality, Roosevelt wanted to squelch Long and tame labor. And Johnson repeatedly ordered Hubert Humphrey to bring the civil rights demonstrations to an end, saying that they weren’t helping the cause. King got a lot of pressure – to say nothing of wiretaps and FBI investigations – to get back in step.

Yet it is precisely these movements – independent, disruptive, passionate, demanding bolder reform, taking on entrenched powerful interests – that enabled Roosevelt and Johnson to achieve far more than they ever thought possible. The New Deal we remember – Social Security, the Wagner Act, Fair Labor Standards, the SEC and Glass Stegall, progressive taxation – came not in the first 100 days, but as Roosevelt, under pressure from his left, geared up for re-election. The Voting Rights Act surely would not have been passed with Selma, and many other sacrifices transforming public opinion to enable Johnson to act.

The absence of these movements on the left opens dangerous space for ersatz populist movements on the right. We saw that with the tea-bag parties that Fox huckstered. We’ve seen conservatives conflate the trillions going to bolster the banks with vital spending in the recovery plan to get the economy going. They are weaving a corrosive message that ties big spending in Washington with Wall Street wastrels. The country would be far better served with an angry populist movement that indicts Wall Street but demands greater support for working families and Main Street. But anyone building that movement will have to understand that they might earn respect, but they won’t be loved in the White House.

For citizens, as with Obama, 100 days is too early to judge. In these first weeks, we’ve done a good job of organizing to support key elements of the president’s agenda. But we’ve seen little evidence of a progressive movement that can challenge the limits of that agenda, and rouse an aggrieved citizenry to open up the space for the president to act far more boldly.

Grades for the first 100 days? The president, I’d say, is doing a lot better than we, his supporters, are.

Get ready to rumble: the fight for the next economy begins

 

Robert Borosage

Robert Borosage

Robert L. Borosage

Co-Director Campaign for America’s Future

We are headed into the most ambitious era of progressive economic reform since the New Deal. The crisis leaves little alternative, as job losses mount across the country and the world. The Obama administration has hit the ground running, pushing to pass an $800 billion plus recovery plan, scrambling to put together a new plan for banks still on life support, and cobbling together an initiative to help millions of families on the verge of losing their homes.

But recovery, however daunting, is not enough. Even as the administration struggles to fend off a full-scale depression, it faces the task of constructing the foundations of the new economy out of the ashes of the old.

Republicans, still grousing about more tax cuts and less spending, are clueless. But even many Democrats seem to assume that if we just get the economy going, bail out the banks, add a dash of regulation, we can go back to business as usual.

But that is neither possible nor desirable. That old economy was founded on stagnant incomes and unsustainable debt. Families struggled to keep their heads above water by taking money out of their homes and assuming ever higher levels of student, car, credit card and consumer loans. The country served as the consumer of last resort for the world by borrowing staggering sums — $2 billion a day over the last years – from creditors abroad, largely Japanese and Chinese central bankers. That economy was floated on asset bubbles like that in housing which has now exploded in our faces. We can’t resuscitate the old economy – and should not want to.

The next economy must seek to provide a sustainable and a widely shared prosperity, one where the American dream remains in reach for working people. That will require new thinking and bold reforms. A group of progressive organizations have joined together to kick off this discussion. (For the first conference on “thinking big, thinking forward — already oversubscribed — go here.)

But many of the changes needed are clear — and the initial struggles over signature reforms are already teed up.

What is needed to insure to every person a job with a decent wage, a world class public education, affordable health care, and retirement with dignity? This is the pledge Franklin Roosevelt made when he laid out his Economic Bill of Rights in the midst of World War II. It was echoed in Obama’s inaugural address. Surely that new economy must include:

1. A new public social compact — affordable health care, pensions above Social Security — to replace the promises that the corporations have shredded. The signature fight over health care reform will begin this year. 

2. Sustained public investment in areas vital to a maintaining a high wage path in a global economy — world class schools, affordable college, 21st century infrastructure, cutting edge science, research and development. The first volleys of the signature battle — over whether we will sustain expanded public investment after the economy regains its footing or short-change it –are already being exchanged. 

3. A new global economic strategy — featuring a new industrial policy — that enables the US to balance its trade, while creating global rules that protect workers, consumers and the environment, rather than threaten them. The initial struggle over making the transition to renewable energy the centerpiece of economic reform is beginning. 

4. Restructuring and regulation of the financial sector, making banking a boring occupation again, devoted to making loans to the real economy, not hawking exotic instruments in operatic speculative ventures. The signature reform — taking over and breaking up the major banks that are on life support — is likely to be fought out in the next months. 

5. An aggressive wage policy that empowers workers to organize and bargain collectively, raises the minimum wage, and mandates basic benefits and safety standards. The donnybrook will begin this Spring over the Employee Free Choice Act. 

These are fundamental choices threatening entrenched interests. Health care reform requires taking on the drug and insurance companies. Sustaining public investment requires defeating the military lobby and the wealthy whose taxes will rise. A new global strategy challenges the multinationals that profit from the old order. Getting Wall Street under control threatens the largest political donors. The business lobby promises Armageddon if the Employee Free Choice Act moves forward.

President Obama has already signaled his intention to go forward with the core reforms in this agenda. So forget about a new era of bipartisan consensus and get ready to rumble. We’re headed into pitched battles that will succeed only with massive popular mobilization. We won’t have this opportunity again, and we dare not blow it.

This moment screams for boldness, not piddling plans for Obama’s first 100 days

Leo W. Gerard

Leo W. Gerard

By Leo W. Gerard

International President

Within hours of Barack Obama’s election, naysayers chastened caution. Don’t go too far, they inveighed. Build trust slowly with restrained, moderate, and gradual actions, they admonished.

In other words: Start with piddling plans.

Basically, they want to abort hope — kill it before it has a chance.

That is all wrong after an election in which it’s believed that a higher percentage of Americans voted than at any time in the past 40 years; a win that brought tears to the eyes of even hardened reporters; a result that drew joyful citizens into streets across the country to celebrate, a balloting that swept even larger majorities of Democrats into the U.S. House and Senate.

This moment during which the nation is suffering great economic peril pleads for political valor. This moment screams for boldness.

Troubled times demand greatness. Franklin D. Roosevelt knew that. He’s the reason U.S. presidents are judged by the sum of their accomplishments in their first 100 days in office.

When FDR was inaugurated in 1933, the country was in the midst of the Great Depression. He didn’t waste time tinkering. After 100 days, he’d given the country the Emergency Banking Act, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Civilian Conservation Corps, the Federal Emergency Relief Act and the Tennessee Valley Authority.

Obama may not inherit a Great Depression, but he’ll take the oath during an intense recession. Look at the news that arrived the same week as his election: unemployment rose to 6.5 percent after 10 straight months of jobs losses totaling more than 1.2 million; the stock market dropped 1,000 points in 48 hours after the worst October showing in two decades; auto makers travelled to Capitol Hill begging like hobos for handouts to stave off bankruptcy, two dozen major retailers revealed sales declines, most double digit, and the New York Times reported hospitals strained as they register fewer paying patients and increasing charity cases.

These problems won’t be solved with timidity. In his first press conference after the election, Obama said resolving the economic crisis is his top priority. He said, in fact, “I will confront the economic crisis head on.” No weak-heartedness suggested there.

He said a new president can restore confidence and advance an agenda for the middle class. That is exactly what FDR did with the combination of legislation and fireside chats.

During this brief press conference, Obama got it right, emphasizing aid to the middle class. He said it is essential to pass a rescue plan that would create jobs and extend unemployment benefits. He wants aid to state and local governments so they don’t increase taxes or furlough workers.

The federal government should help both small businesses and the huge auto industry, which provides jobs directly and indirectly through its suppliers.

The $700 billion bailout must be reviewed, he said, to ensure that it is stabilizing markets, that it’s not unduly rewarding the Wall Street risk-takers who caused the crisis, and that it’s helping families avoid foreclosure.

In addition, he said it’s essential to implement policies to grow the middle class such as investing in clean energy technology, resolving the nation’s health insurance dilemma, and providing tax relief for working families.

These are the correct priorities. And his plans are audacious. Which means he needs our help.

He called for bi-partisan cooperation in accomplishing these goals. But he’ll need more than that. He will need the kind of support he got in those weeks just before Election Day.

All of those who voted for him, all of those who want to keep hope alive, and all of those who want real change must demand both houses of Congress and both political parties work with Obama to accomplish it. Those who believe in real change must make it clear that they won’t stand by and allow courageous action to be reduced to faint-hearted baby steps.

On election night, Obama told the crowd in Chicago that the victory was theirs: “I know you didn’t do this just to win an election and I know you didn’t do it for me.”

Then he warned of what is ahead:

“You did it because you understand the enormity of the task that lies ahead. For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime – two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century.”

With more than 10,000 volunteers across the country, the United Steelworkers campaigned hard to help get Obama on that Chicago stage to make that speech. We will back him as he works to fulfill his promises of what is a New Deal for the new century. And we urge every American who wants real change to join us to ensure his success, the nation’s success.