Judging by the strictly party-line vote the House had over Obama's stimulus package, you would think few things have changed in Washington. You are right and wrong.
As many newspapers and political analysts have noted, this was hardly expected. The Republicans are finding their niche in being the stubborn roadblock the Democrats never could become when Bush held a majority in Congress. They squeezed Obama to see how much he could bare, and then played Washington nice by applauding his efforts to reach out to them and then denying him of any of their support.
This, unfortunately, is nothing new. When Reagan entered office, his greatest concern was the economy, but he had many pet projects he wanted to implement as soon as he set foot in the office. These projects were postponed for more than year because he faced a Democratic Congress that would not budge. Until they did.
Obama has not hidden the fact that he admires Reagan. Not as the Republican demi-god he quickly became, but as the transformative political animal he proved to be. A politician with a smaller resume than most in his cabinet, Reagan came into the White House based mostly off of his charisma and calming demeanor.
He never quit being Hollywood, and he made Washington a compelling dramedy. Obama was chided by his Democratic opponents early in the primary by respectfully acknowledging the "transformative" power Reagan had during his tenure. He can now follow that praise with practice.
Reagan could hardly be considered a bipartisan figure. He was proudly conservative, a loyal Republican, and not afraid to hide or downplay either fact. But he was able to pass most of his agenda despite a Democratic Congress at odds in the most fundamental level. How? He knew the core principle of politics: compromise. You give me this, and I will let you have that. He promised Democrats that he would campaign for any of their Republican adversaries in the coming election if they voted for his stimulus package. He promised abortion issues would be postponed for a year. He scratched their backs, and they rolled over theirs.
This backfired a bit, as Republicans felt like they were being sold out. And, essentially, they were. Reagan was wooing the Democrats to pass his most pressing, and eventually most winning, piece of legislation. When he received accolades for reaching across the aisle when necessary, he used that political capital to catapult his more idealogical agenda.
Yet the core of Reagan's approach is the core of a realistic approach to bipartisanship. Obama should know this. He was raised and educated by the hard knocks of Chicago politicking. He knows what it means to compromise, and is tactful enough to avoid becoming too bareknuckled and do a Blago. This may be a reason why Obama noted Reagan's influence. He knows that in order to see results and win friends in Washington, a tit for tat is the right path to take, instead than arm twisting or chest thumping.
If Obama can be charismatic, calming, and sly like Reagan, he may win over enough votes to have his stimulus package pass through the Senate. Otherwise, he will have a thorn in his shoe, and his celebrity and goodwill will be wasted. The question is, is he as sly as they say he is?
lhp
