Commentary Magazine


Topic: final product

Thanks, but No Thanks

This report explains a phenomenon startling only to those who misunderstand the fundamental character of the American middle class:

President Barack Obama returned Thursday to the city where he launched his health care plan nearly three years ago to sell the final product, part of a broader economic agenda that is gaining legislative steam in Washington.

But the people he says his policies are targeted to — the middle class — are the ones he appears to be losing. … As Mr. Obama pushes the agenda forward, middle class voters are moving away, according to polling. Middle-income voters—those earning between $50,000 and $75,000 a year, take a negative view, on the whole, of the president’s job performance, with 52% disapproving and 42% approving, according to the March Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll. Among all wage groups, by contrast, opinion on Mr. Obama is nearly evenly split, with 48% approving and 47% disapproving, according to the poll. A year earlier, voters in the $50,000-to-$75,000 bracket had a far more positive view of the president, with 56% approving and 29% disapproving of his job performance

The Obami assumed they could bind the middle class to both government and the Democratic Party by giving them lots of goodies, most especially “free” or “nearly free” health care. But instead, suspicion and resentment have grown, worry about the debt and taxes to pay for all this have skyrocketed, and the voters whom Obama is supposed to be helping don’t feel helped at all.

In some sense, it is a refreshing reminder that the public remains intensely skeptical of big government and is more sophisticated than politicians assume. Moreover, individuals’ own life experiences tell them Obamism doesn’t work — unemployment remains at record levels, and health-care costs continue to rise. So that resentment and skepticism will only continue. In November, voters will have an opportunity to tell incumbents, “Thanks, but no thanks.” They can emphasize the need for a new course away from a European social-welfare model and toward the free-market system traditionally at the source of American freedom and prosperity. In short, the voters can show they can’t be bribed into accepting permanent dependency on an ever-growing federal government.

This report explains a phenomenon startling only to those who misunderstand the fundamental character of the American middle class:

President Barack Obama returned Thursday to the city where he launched his health care plan nearly three years ago to sell the final product, part of a broader economic agenda that is gaining legislative steam in Washington.

But the people he says his policies are targeted to — the middle class — are the ones he appears to be losing. … As Mr. Obama pushes the agenda forward, middle class voters are moving away, according to polling. Middle-income voters—those earning between $50,000 and $75,000 a year, take a negative view, on the whole, of the president’s job performance, with 52% disapproving and 42% approving, according to the March Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll. Among all wage groups, by contrast, opinion on Mr. Obama is nearly evenly split, with 48% approving and 47% disapproving, according to the poll. A year earlier, voters in the $50,000-to-$75,000 bracket had a far more positive view of the president, with 56% approving and 29% disapproving of his job performance

The Obami assumed they could bind the middle class to both government and the Democratic Party by giving them lots of goodies, most especially “free” or “nearly free” health care. But instead, suspicion and resentment have grown, worry about the debt and taxes to pay for all this have skyrocketed, and the voters whom Obama is supposed to be helping don’t feel helped at all.

In some sense, it is a refreshing reminder that the public remains intensely skeptical of big government and is more sophisticated than politicians assume. Moreover, individuals’ own life experiences tell them Obamism doesn’t work — unemployment remains at record levels, and health-care costs continue to rise. So that resentment and skepticism will only continue. In November, voters will have an opportunity to tell incumbents, “Thanks, but no thanks.” They can emphasize the need for a new course away from a European social-welfare model and toward the free-market system traditionally at the source of American freedom and prosperity. In short, the voters can show they can’t be bribed into accepting permanent dependency on an ever-growing federal government.

Read Less

They All Own It

On the floor of the U.S. Senate, Mitch McConnell, among the cagier and more effective Republicans, uttered a final thought in his fiery denunciation of the health-care bill: “All it takes is one. Just one. One can stop it — or every one will own it.” Every one of the Democrats who voted in lockstep for cloture after 1 a.m. now owns the health-care bill. Each of the senators up in 2010 becomes the decisive vote. And each of them up in 2012 as well. In each and every race, this vote will be one of the top, if not the top issue, and voters enraged by one or another of the bill’s provisions (e.g., abortion subsidies, the violation of Obama’s pledge not to tax families with income less than $250,000, the slashing of Medicare) will get to register their disapproval.

As McConnell pointed out dryly, “But make no mistake: if the people who wrote this bill were proud of it, they wouldn’t be forcing this vote in the dead of night. … The final product is a mess — and so is the process that’s brought us here to vote on a bill that the American people overwhelmingly oppose.”

The bill will have to go to conference committee after passage by the Senate. Speculation is that Nancy Pelosi will run roughshod over her caucus and try to change virtually nothing so as to hold in place hard-won Senate votes. The task won’t be easy, as she may well have to go scrambling for votes lost from Rep. Bart Stupak and other pro-life Democrats unwilling to accept the Ben Nelson abortion language, which has been roundly condemned by pro-life groups. But make no mistake about how shrewd she can be. As one Hill aide put it:

Pelosi can be pretty persuasive down there on the floor. She turned 10 Dems who didn’t want to vote for their second stimulus last week to get the votes she needed. She’ll promise everything under the sun — campaign cash, committee slots, pork projects, etc — whatever she needs to put it over the top.

And she’ll need to offer a lot. For by then, the American people will have learned more about the “mess” they’re about to receive, and House members will be demanding plenty of those Pelosi goodies in exchange for a vote that could quite possibly end their careers.

On the floor of the U.S. Senate, Mitch McConnell, among the cagier and more effective Republicans, uttered a final thought in his fiery denunciation of the health-care bill: “All it takes is one. Just one. One can stop it — or every one will own it.” Every one of the Democrats who voted in lockstep for cloture after 1 a.m. now owns the health-care bill. Each of the senators up in 2010 becomes the decisive vote. And each of them up in 2012 as well. In each and every race, this vote will be one of the top, if not the top issue, and voters enraged by one or another of the bill’s provisions (e.g., abortion subsidies, the violation of Obama’s pledge not to tax families with income less than $250,000, the slashing of Medicare) will get to register their disapproval.

As McConnell pointed out dryly, “But make no mistake: if the people who wrote this bill were proud of it, they wouldn’t be forcing this vote in the dead of night. … The final product is a mess — and so is the process that’s brought us here to vote on a bill that the American people overwhelmingly oppose.”

The bill will have to go to conference committee after passage by the Senate. Speculation is that Nancy Pelosi will run roughshod over her caucus and try to change virtually nothing so as to hold in place hard-won Senate votes. The task won’t be easy, as she may well have to go scrambling for votes lost from Rep. Bart Stupak and other pro-life Democrats unwilling to accept the Ben Nelson abortion language, which has been roundly condemned by pro-life groups. But make no mistake about how shrewd she can be. As one Hill aide put it:

Pelosi can be pretty persuasive down there on the floor. She turned 10 Dems who didn’t want to vote for their second stimulus last week to get the votes she needed. She’ll promise everything under the sun — campaign cash, committee slots, pork projects, etc — whatever she needs to put it over the top.

And she’ll need to offer a lot. For by then, the American people will have learned more about the “mess” they’re about to receive, and House members will be demanding plenty of those Pelosi goodies in exchange for a vote that could quite possibly end their careers.

Read Less

An Ideologue Instead of a Statesman

The results of races for the governorship of Virginia and New Jersey were ominous for Democrats. The most alarming development for them should be that independents voted for the GOP candidates by roughly a 2-to-1 margin. This was a sea change, and it took place in only a year.

There are several reasons Democrats are faltering at this juncture. But one explanation, I think, is more relevant than all others: President Obama is pushing a hugely expensive and ambitious domestic agenda the public simply does not want. Many Americans also believe that what Obama is doing is a diversion from the pressing issues confronting the country — a weak economy, the highest rates of unemployment and underemployment in more than a quarter century (the figure now stands at 17.5 percent), and an exploding deficit and debt.

Virtually every public-opinion poll shows considerable resistance to ObamaCare, the signature domestic program of the Obama presidency. Cap-and-trade is about as unpopular. In addition, public sentiment is turning hard against government spending, control, and activism, which are at the core of Obamaism. Read More

The results of races for the governorship of Virginia and New Jersey were ominous for Democrats. The most alarming development for them should be that independents voted for the GOP candidates by roughly a 2-to-1 margin. This was a sea change, and it took place in only a year.

There are several reasons Democrats are faltering at this juncture. But one explanation, I think, is more relevant than all others: President Obama is pushing a hugely expensive and ambitious domestic agenda the public simply does not want. Many Americans also believe that what Obama is doing is a diversion from the pressing issues confronting the country — a weak economy, the highest rates of unemployment and underemployment in more than a quarter century (the figure now stands at 17.5 percent), and an exploding deficit and debt.

Virtually every public-opinion poll shows considerable resistance to ObamaCare, the signature domestic program of the Obama presidency. Cap-and-trade is about as unpopular. In addition, public sentiment is turning hard against government spending, control, and activism, which are at the core of Obamaism.

Trust in government is down to 23 percent — the lowest in at least a dozen years. More than three quarters of the public believe that the federal government does the right thing either never or only some of the time. Large majorities believe the president and Congress should worry about the budget deficit above almost anything else. The percentage of Americans who believe that there is too much government regulation has risen sharply in a year (from 38 percent in 2008 to 45 percent this year); so has the number of people who say government is doing too many things better left to business (the number has increased from 40 percent to 48 percent). Not surprisingly, the overall approval of the job that Congress is doing is now at 24 percent. And Obama himself has seen a historic drop in his support during his first year in office.

There is more. According to the latest Gallup poll, Republicans have moved ahead of Democrats by 48 percent to 44 percent among registered voters in the generic congressional ballot for the 2010 House elections, with independents’ preference for the Republican candidate in their districts having grown to an astonishing 22-point lead over a Democratic candidate (52 percent to 30 percent).

And a new Pew poll finds that voters who plan to support Republicans next year are more enthusiastic than those who plan to vote for a Democrat. Fully 58 percent of those who plan to vote for a Republican next year say they are very enthusiastic about voting, compared with only 42 percent of those who plan to vote for a Democrat. And 56 percent of independent voters who support a Republican in their district are very enthusiastic about voting, as opposed to just 32 percent of independents who plan to vote for a Democrat expressing high levels of enthusiasm. Anti-incumbent sentiments are near all-time highs. More broadly, according to Pew,

The mood of America is glum. Two-thirds of the public is dissatisfied with the way things are going in the country. Fully nine-in-ten say that national economic conditions are only fair or poor, and nearly two-thirds describe their own finances that way — the most since the summer of 1992.

Democrats have convinced themselves that passing a historic health-care bill — which is still far from certain — will change all that. Their supposition is that while the legislative process may be unseemly, the final product will be popular. The mere act of passing health-care reform will be a huge political victory for the president and Democrats — and will redound to their benefit. Or so goes the theory. But it is, I think, a misguided one.

Jamming through an unpopular program of this size and scope without bipartisan support is a prescription for a public backlash. Moreover, the basic design of the program Democrats are advocating is deeply flawed — and bad policies make for bad politics. Yet even with public skepticism giving way to public opposition, with widespread concern transmuting into widespread anxiety and unhappiness, Obama continues to push ahead with his agenda. Why?

Because Mr. Obama came in to office determined to reshape American society in deep and lasting ways — and health care is the best vehicle through which that reshaping will occur. It doesn’t matter that this is something the public does not want; in his mind, and in the minds of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, it is something the public needs. Call it progressive paternalism.

The president and his team made a huge wager at the outset of Obama’s tenure. They would use the economic crisis they faced to push through a sweeping agenda (“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste” is how chief of staff Rahm Emanuel put it.) Instead of focusing on the major problems confronting the nation, they would leverage those problems to achieve other aims. And this will be seen in retrospect as a huge, perhaps historic, mistake on their part.

“The truth is, gentlemen, a statesman is the creature of his age, the child of circumstances, the creation of his times,” Disraeli said.

A statesman is essentially a practical character; and when he is called upon to take office, he is not to inquire what his opinion might or might not have been on this or that subject; he is only to ascertain the needful and the beneficial, and the most feasible measure to be carried out.

What we are finding is that Barack Obama is not a practical character; he is a dogmatist. He has avoided what’s needed and beneficial in order to promote a sweeping statist agenda. He is turning out to be an ideologue instead of a statesman.

The enormous goodwill the president had at the beginning of the year has evaporated. The public still rather likes him — but they don’t much like what he is doing to them and to their country. There will be a high price for him to pay for carrying through on his liberal ambitions. But it is his party — the instrument of his ambitions — that will suffer the consequences first.

Read Less




Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor to our site, you are allowed 8 free articles this month.
This is your first of 8 free articles.

If you are already a digital subscriber, log in here »

Print subscriber? For free access to the website and iPad, register here »

To subscribe, click here to see our subscription offers »

Please note this is an advertisement skip this ad
Clearly, you have a passion for ideas.
Subscribe today for unlimited digital access to the publication that shapes the minds of the people who shape our world.
Get for just
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor, you are allowed 8 free articles.
This is your first article.
You have read of 8 free articles this month.
YOU HAVE READ 8 OF 8
FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
for full access to
CommentaryMagazine.com
INCLUDES FULL ACCESS TO:
Digital subscriber?
Print subscriber? Get free access »
Call to subscribe: 1-800-829-6270
You can also subscribe
on your computer at
CommentaryMagazine.com.
LOG IN WITH YOUR
COMMENTARY MAGAZINE ID
Don't have a CommentaryMagazine.com log in?
CREATE A COMMENTARY
LOG IN ID
Enter you email address and password below. A confirmation email will be sent to the email address that you provide.