What price bipartisanship?

I have this sense, as week two of the Obama administration comes to a close, that the two central essences of then-candidate Barack Obama are at war in President Obama.

Obama, based on his own words, is a liberal, a man with progressive instincts who views government as a positive force. But, as his bland campaign tome The Audacity of Hope demonstrated, he also seeks to be a conciliator, “a uniter not a divider,” to borrow George W. Bush’s empty phrase.

We have a massive, progressive stimulus plan that features modernization of the electric grid, mass transit, new schools, green techologies and a rebuilt safety net. And we have concessions, a willingness by the Democrat called by Republicans during the campaign the “most liberal candidate in history.”

Concessions — like conservative Judd Gregg for commerce, like expanded tax cuts in the stimulus, like solid programs being removed.

Rachel Maddow on her show tonight had a graphic behind her that said, “They’re Just Not that Into You.” The message: Enough. President Obama, the GOP will not follow you down the stimulus path and that is OK. Let them vote no and remain lost in the wilderness. Let them show themselves as the impediments that they are.

I am fearful, however, that the administration’s conciliatory approach will win out, at great cost to his program.

As E.J. Dionne Jr. writes:

If achieving bipartisanship takes priority over the actual content of policy, Republicans are handed a powerful weapon. In theory, they can keep moving the bipartisan bar indefinitely. And each concession to their sensibilities threatens the solidarity in the president’s own camp.

That’s why last week’s unanimous House Republican opposition to the stimulus plan was so important. For the most part, the Republicans escaped attack for rank partisanship. Instead, what should have been hailed as an administration victory was cast in large parts of the media as a kind of defeat: Obama had placed a heavy emphasis on bipartisanship, and he failed to achieve it.

The goal, however, is not some squishy bipartisanship but an effect stimulus that gets the economy moving, catches those falling and leaves us with an improved America down the road. Dionne, again:

The real test is whether Obama will fight for a stimulus bill that achieves some of his larger objectives. The aspects of the House bill that Republicans and conservative commentators have so eviscerated are the very ones that take substantial steps toward the president’s own priorities.

Obama placed a heavy bet during his campaign on a promise to reform the heath-care system. To the great consternation of conservatives, the House stimulus bill takes big steps toward broadening the number of Americans government would help to obtain health insurance. Will those provisions be protected in the final bill?

The president has spoken passionately about the inadequacy of our schools and the increasing difficulty that young Americans are having paying for higher education. The House stimulus bill includes a lot of education money. Will students be thrown overboard in pursuit of a nebulous cross-party comity?

Author: hankkalet

Hank Kalet is a poet and freelance journalist. He is the economic needs reporter for NJ Spotlight, teaches journalism at Rutgers University and writing at Middlesex County College and Brookdale Community College. He writes a semi-monthly column for the Progressive Populist. He is a lifelong fan of the New York Mets and New York Knicks, drinks too much coffee and attends as many Bruce Springsteen concerts as his meager finances will allow. He lives in South Brunswick with his wife Annie. View all posts by hankkalet