The conventional liberal interpretation of current events is that, one year after winning the U.S. presidential election, Barack Obama does not have much to show for his presidency. In a now notorious Saturday Night Live skit, Obama was lampooned for doing “jack” and “squat.” To the American left he promised universal health care, an end to the war in Iraq, the closure of Guantanamo Bay, more humane treatment of detained terrorist suspects, and serious legislation on gay rights and the environment. A year later, he has accomplished none of those things.
Of course, to big-government-loving liberals, accomplishment is synonymous with “doing”—taxing, spending, legislating, and “reforming.” That Barack Obama hasn’t rammed the entirety of the American liberal agenda down people’s throats is certainly disappointing to a left-wing movement incapable of logically defending its own views and values in front of an opposition audience (Fox News anyone?). Moving away from this “doing is good” paradigm, the conservative critique is even more devastating. It actually focuses on the content and substance of legislation the Obama administration has passed, and critiques him for what he has “accomplished.”
Liberals like to argue that despite their unmet expectations, Obama has done a satisfactory job in tackling the most immediate crises: bailing out the banks and re-stimulating the economy. Putting aside the fact that spending large amounts of taxpayer money is not a particularly courageous or praise-worthy feat, as all governments do it, the type of bill Obama churned out failed even these abysmally low expectations. Instead of taking leadership and “owning” the bill, Obama left a majority of the spending designs to the discretion of Congressional Democrats. The result was a gargantuan $787-billion stimulus package replete with pork and goodies for Democratic districts. The irony is that despite the haste in assembling the package, the majority of the stimulus money will not be spent until 2010 or 2011. It is no surprise then that recent unemployment figures have hit the double digits.
On trade, a vital component to the revitalization of the international economy, Obama has turned his back on basic economic principle. Despite having a brilliant cabinet of economists, from the venerated Lawrence Summers to the competent Timothy Geitner, Obama has instituted various protectionist measures through “Buy American” clauses. The Economist, a magazine that endorsed his candidacy, attacked his recent 35 per cent tariff on imported Chinese tires as “a protectionist move that is bad politics, bad economics, bad diplomacy and hurts America. Did we miss anything?” Obama talks about embracing international multilateralism, but his recent measures on trade strongly contradict the previous commitments made to his G20 partners.
As Democratic ambitions for single-payer health care in the United States is debated, Barack Obama would be wise to take into consideration Republican proposals. If he wants to cut health care costs, he could eliminate state laws that prevent health care providers from competing across state lines. Canadians are used to hearing the old refrain that the American “free-market” system costs more, but this is a gross misconception. With the current regulations in place, America does not so much have a free market health-care system as a network of 50 health care oligopolies. If Obama wants to expand coverage to those who can’t afford their own health care, he should provide a simple, no-hassle, means-tested subsidy. If he shares the concerns of working class citizens whose health care is at the mercy of their employers, he should help them establish job-independent health care savings accounts. He has promised to be bi-partisan and to transcend ideology from day one, but he has shot down all these Republican ideas.
This is just a cursory glance at the Obama administration’s efforts so far. Other disappointments include mismanaging Chinese-American relations, failing to provide solidarity to the Iranian opposition, and leaving his cap-and-trade bill vulnerable to predatory special interests. One year later, poor performance on trade, health care, and economic stimulus are enough to give Barack Obama the 51.5 per cent approval rating he deserves.
