Through understanding, grasping the sense of the world as we dance through the movement of history....
If we roll back to the Democratic Presidential debate among all the Democratic nominees, one of the main consensuses was including a public option in the future Health Care bill. Unfortunately, with my dismay, the public option was thrown away due to political reasons. This is one promise that President Obama has clearly broke with the American people. With the debate of cutting the national deficit looming, I believe there would be another broken promise in the coming months.
The Republican control of the house makes the political landscape more difficult to maneuver for the Obama Administration, but nevertheless the President’s guiding force in executing actions seems to be rooted in ideology opposed to political calculations. This is not helpful, if the debate in Washington is dominated by politicians acting according to their political future. The Republican Party in the last two years has been political utilitarians opposed to principled actors. The Democratic Party in Congress has responded by also foregoing their principles and acting according to political calculus. That explains why several critical legislations that are important to the hearts of the Democratic Party failed, because the Democrats found that acting according to political compromises will be better than ramming legislations against the Republican blockade.
The debate of cutting the deficit, which the Republicans have led, has partially focused on tax cuts. Democrats argue that giving tax cuts for everyone kills government revenue, which will increase the national deficit. Republicans argue that not giving the tax cuts to those making over $250,000 will kill the economy, because the rich wouldn’t spend as much unless they were given a tax break. The issue includes various dimensions, but the main point is to illustrate the political heat in the debate.
Let us return to President Obama. Before the election, he was adamant that he would not give tax breaks to those making above $250,000. His reasons are rooted in principled form; the rich is obligated to help the country to pay a little more while the crumbling American middle class gets continued help from the government. Because he was acting as a principled actor on this issue, he was not going to compromise on this point.
After the election, he seems to shift his position by opening up the possibility of allowing tax breaks to all Americans. I believe this is caused by his shift towards the political utilitarian mindset. Democrats barely have control in Washington, and unless the economy improves the political future of the party is bleak. Working with the Republicans on this issue and perhaps compromising on several key points might insulate President Obama and his party from a political defeat in 2012.
From the eyes of the voter, this is another critical event where Obama’s promise is broken due to political circumstance. In my opinion, President Obama never represented change. He is another old politics in Washington, the same body that he mentioned in his book “The Audacity of Hope”
