Pragmatism, or dumbing down expectations?

Talk is cheap.

Yes, it is easy for me to comment and editorialize about the big (and small) issues of the day. But, hey, that is what democracy is all about. In fact, I wish more people would do the same. Those of you reading this, well, start your own blog. Write to your elected reps. Better yet, unseat them next time around!!!

I have been cautiously optimistic about BHO ever since his campaign days. My first red flag was when I heard him being interviewed on NPR--I think it was with Michelle Norris. This was way back, even before he announced his candidacy. She asked Obama more than once whether he was planning on a presidential bid. And, every time Obama hedged his responses so well that I kept thinking he reminded me of somebody, but I could not place who it was.

Later as the campaign picked up momentum, I concluded (and shared with maybe two or three people) that it was Bill Clinton he reminded me of, and that Obama was Slick Willie without the sex :-) Of course, I will gladly take a Slick Willie without sex over the muddler from Midland, or the phoenix that is older than the pyramids. But, hey, Obama is slickness as we have never seen before.

The two or three people I shared this with thought I was being cynical. My daughter calls me a naysayer. I call myself a realistic and cautious optimist. Which is probably why the David Brooks column appealed to me--about BHO prioritizing legislative pragmatism. And, that is also why I find this FT column by Clive Crook so apropos; here is an excerpt:

On both climate change and healthcare, in other words, the US wills the end but not the means. This is where a president trusted by the electorate and unafraid to explain hard choices would be so valuable. Barack Obama, where are you?

The president has cast himself not as a leader of reform, but as a cheerleader for “reform” – meaning anything, really, that can plausibly be called reform, however flawed. He has defined success down so far that many kinds of failure now qualify. Without hesitating, he has cast aside principles he emphasised during the campaign. On healthcare, for instance, he opposed an individual insurance mandate. On climate change, he was firm on the need to auction all emissions permits. Congress proposes to do the opposite in both cases and Mr Obama’s instant response is: “That will do nicely.”

The White House calls this pragmatism. Never let the best be the enemy of the good. Better to take one step forward than blah, blah, blah. The argument sounds appealing and makes some sense, but is worth probing.

First one must ask whether the bills really do represent progress, however modest. As they stand, this is doubtful, especially in the case of cap-and-trade. Then one must ask whether the US will get to where it needs to be on climate change and healthcare via a series of small steps. Perhaps the country has just one chance in the foreseeable future to get it right. The White House has said as much: “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” Botch these policies this time, and it may be years before Congress can start again.

A White House that is more interested in promotion than in product development has another great drawback: it squanders talent. Mr Obama has impeccable taste in advisers: he has scooped up many of the country’s pre-eminent experts in almost every area of public policy. One wonders why. On the main domestic issues, they are not designing policy; they are working the phones, drumming up support for bills they would be deploring if they were not in the administration. Apart from anything else, this seems cruel. Mr President, examine your conscience and set your experts free.

The greatest waste of talent in all this, however, is that of Mr Obama himself. Congress offers change without change – a green economy built on cheap coal and petrol; a healthcare transformation that asks nobody to pay more taxes or behave any differently – because that is what voters want. Is it too much to ask that Mr Obama should tell voters the truth?

Yes, it is easy for me to write such stuff, and it is way harder--immensely more difficult--to not only lead the country, but also set the pace for the entire world. But, you know, even Rama had his critiques!