The Measure of Obama's Presidency by Mike Lux

[KoKo]

The Measure of Obama's Presidency
by Mike Lux
Posted: June 12, 2009 04:35 PM
-snip-
My point here is not that Bill Clinton was a bad guy or a bad president. He got some good things done, including Family and Medical Leave, S-CHIP, an increase in the minimum wage, and progressive tax changes, among others. He presided over 8 years of solid economic growth and peace. But he did not deliver the big lasting progressive changes he promised because he was largely unwilling to stand up to the big special interests in corporate America.

-snip-


There are two questions now in front of us that will determine Obama's ultimate success:

1. Will the Democrats in the House and Senate that are closely allied with big corporate interests back their corporate friends or Obama? There are a lot of Democrats who have historic ties to the insurance, energy, and financial interests, and who have (not to jump to conclusions or anything) taken a lot of their money. A lot of those Democrats are on the relevant committees working on the big bills affecting those industries, and we just saw an example of how those industry ties can twist a piece of good legislation into something far worse when you compare what Chairman Waxman wanted to do with the tortured thing that came limping out of his committee on climate change. We are about to see this process at work in Senate Finance on the health care bill. With Obama, the House leadership, and most Democrats in Congress on record in support of a public option, it is pretty strange that this conservative committee that has so many members so close to the insurance industry is having such an outsize role the debate. No matter what comes out of that committee, though, Democrats need to be very clear that they need to deliver a strong bill, one that takes on the insurance companies, and get it passed this year.

It's the same deal with the final climate change bill, and it's the same deal with financial regulatory reform later this year. Democrats will have to take on big oil and Wall Street to actually begin to solve these problems.

2. Will the White House itself see the fight against special interests through? President Obama cannot solve this country's short and long term economic crisis without taking on beating big insurance, energy, and financial interests, and I believe he knows that. But every politician has a cautious streak, and does not want to go down to defeat on big fights -- for good reason, because the iron law of politics is that winning makes you stronger and losing makes you weaker. The temptation will be to cut the comfortable deals that making winning legislative fights easier to do, the deals that avoid big confrontations with powerful special interests. That was the path Clinton ultimately chose on one issue after another, and the path that many, many people will urge Obama to take.
The problems we face, though -- with our economy and our broken financial system, with a health care system out of control, with climate change -- they will just not get solved unless we confront the problem industries directly and make them change their destructive behavior. Obama has courageously started down this road on health care and energy. Now he needs to demand that Congress follows through and does the right thing, and he needs to make the same push on financial issues.

More of a good read at....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-lux/the-measure-of-obamas-pre_b_215034.html

[Captain Hilts]

1. I see no signs that Pres. O is going to go after special interests in

corporate America. He put a mining company lobbyist in charge of Interior's mining desk.

He put a lawyer that defended GE's pollution of the Hudson in charge of DoJ's environmental enforcement desk.

He has hugely subsidized financial interests.

Like Clinton, he seems to cut comfortable deals until forced to do otherwise. Look at the pressure it took to limit the salaries/bonuses of banks that received TARP funds, and they still got away with huge last-minute bonuses.

Unlike Clinton he has a clearer electoral mandate and a friendlier Congress. He also has a populace more progressive than government right now. So, I am still optimistic.

[KoKo]

2. He's only been there five months..we have to hope he will "ditch"

some of the "hangers on" who put him into power, and do what he promised us he would.

[LWolf]

3. Your # 1 is flawed.

Since Obama himself backs corporate interests.