I've been thinking hard lately about the happy prospect of Obama winning. I am savoring the possibility that Democrat may gain a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate and a sweeping majority in the House of Representative. I relish the possibility that Democrats may have enough numbers and time to undo the damage done by the last two and half decades of Republican influence on our politics and our policies. And then I worry...
About what?
Well, as much as I look forward to a big Democratic win and hopefully the decimation of the Republicans so the GOP can rediscover common sense and throw its nutjobs overboard, I worry about...the Democrats.
There's just no getting around the fact that special interests, corporate or otherwise, have too great a hold on our political system, constantly compromising sound judgment and long-term national interests. Moreover, the baser instincts of both politicians looking to their next election and constituents looking for government-funded goodies with no regard for their actual necessity absolutely requires someone to block the door to taxpayer money, if only to ensure it is spent responsibly. Ideally, conflicting interests between the parties or parts of the parties would hold that type of bad behavior in check. But, in fact, it does just the opposite. Case in point, the recent bailout bill, which was passed only after an additional $100 billion in tax incentives/goodies were distributed among Congresscritters to make the other $700 billion available. It was simply bribery with a Congressional seal of approval.
It is hardly an open secret that one of the ways business gets done in Congress is through horse trading. But it's not really horse trading as we know it, where one party gives up one thing so a second party can get something in exchange. Rather its horse "trading" in name only since what the two horse traders really want to figure out is how to get horses for each other on someone else's tab--namely taxpayers.
This really does worry me, and it is not a party problem, it is one of human nature. That is why I'm hoping that as soon as Barack Obama is elected his first order of business is to stand firm with Congress about how the country's business gets done. Here, I am thinking back to how Bill Clinton, in his first term, literally got screwed by his own party, which had grown far too complacent and spoiled to even give the time of day to their own president. The question is whether our party has managed to learn its lesson.
My own view is Obama can't afford to have what happened to Clinton happen to him. That means he'll have to use carrots and sticks with his own party. My belief is that the most effective mechanism for cleaning up some of Congress's biggest problems--private earmarks, the complete abandonment of pay-as-you-go funding for programs (and I do mean all programs, especially defense), and loopholes for corporate interests--may well be for Obama to maintain the strength of the campaign machinery he has built with such devastating effectiveness.
Over the years, we've seen presidents explore ways to "speak" over the heads of their parties or even the press in order to get their way. "Bully pulpit" is only the most obvious of these, from Nixon's Checkers speech (which, by the way, worked!) to nationally televised speeches (SOTU, Inaugural speeches, etc.). However, there are now more ways to reach past vested interests, in Congress or within the press, to win those fights for transparency and government accountability that need winning. Obama has that in his campaign machinery and, as crazy as it may seem, abandoning that machinery once the election is over might be the greatest mistake of his life.
If there is one thing that we can learn from George Bush--dunderhead that he might be in so many other ways--the idea of the "neverending campaign" in order to just govern is probably something Obama and his administration will have no choice but to utilize. Fortunately, because of the sheer strength of that campaign in all 50 states, it may well be possible that Obama can make a difference AFTER THE ELECTION and in spite of the aforementioned worst instincts of his fellow Democrats, the electorate, and the traditional media.
There is so much more I'd like to write about this, but I guess I'll have to stop here since I'd love to hear from others: how do we get the right legislation enacted and programs properly funded and the wrong ones discarded and defunded, despite the very real likelihood that our very own Democrats will waffle, something I'm far more worried about Democrats doing than I would have ever worried about with respect to the Republicans. (Chalk it up to the Abused Spouse Syndrome that Democrats still exhibit, even when their opponents have become, for all intents and purposes, roadkill.)