Obama has lost the power to persuade
David Schultz, The Daily Record Newswire
Whatever happened to the Obama presidency? While all presidencies start with hope and promise, Obama’s did so with more than most. But along the way it seemed to lose focus and energy, and in the process the president has been almost powerless for the last four years and will continue to fade in significance over the next two regardless of what happens in the 2014 elections. What Obama lost was something simple — the power to persuade.
Richard Neustadt’s “Presidential Power” arguably remains the best book ever written about the presidency. Drafted in the late 1950s, it used the presidencies of Harry S. Truman and Dwight D. Eisenhower as case studies of why some presidents are more powerful than others. With the FDR presidency, especially its first 100 days, as his reference, Neustadt asserted that presidential power is the power to persuade.
Neustadt opened his book with a famous quote from Truman about Eisenhower: “He’ll sit here, and he’ll say, ‘Do this! Do that!’ And nothing will happen. Poor Ike — it won’t be a bit like the Army. He’ll find it very frustrating.” Unlike generals who can order people around, presidents have limited ability to do that. Instead, operating with a large bureaucracy and a checks and balances constitutional system, the essence of presidential power is the power to persuade — a power Neustadt reduced to the power to bargain.
There is no absolute power of a president. Instead, it is relative to the many other constituencies that he confronts. Presidents need to persuade subordinates, members of Congress, the courts, the press, the public and foreign governments. Each of these constituencies is a source of presidential power and a limitation on it.
Presidents draw from their prestige and reputation. Both are in part influenced by how popular a president is, how successful he has been in the past, and how he conducts himself at critical times, such as in the first 100 days in office. All help define the prestige and reputation of a president, styling how influential he will be in the future.
While Neustadt argued presidents can control part of their destiny, some of their power is beyond their control. The judgments and power of people whom presidents have limited control over and time remaining in office also are factors presidents cannot dictate.
Given Neustadt’s framework, what happened to the Obama presidency? He ran on the banner of “change” and was elected with 52.9 percent of the popular vote (69,500,000 votes) and 365 electoral votes. He was the first African-American president and the first social media president. He was going to reverse the world that George Bush created and he was sworn in with a 67 percent approval rating. He would fix the economy, pass health care insurance reform, tackle immigration, reform the banks, address global warming, end the wars and close Guantanamo Bay. With a strong Democratic Congress behind him, he quickly passed an economic stimulus and issued several executive orders. The Washington Post Monthly in April 2012 listed his impressive top 50 accomplishments that included repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” saving the auto industry, getting bin Laden, winding down the wars, and much more.
But along the way something strange happened: His presidency began to fall apart and his popularity waned. By 2010 his approval rating was down to the mid-40s and the Democrats were routed in the midterm elections. Yes, he won re-election in 2012, but it was against a weak candidate, and Obama drew 3.5 million fewer votes than in 2008. His approvals are in the low 40s now, according to Gallup, similar to his predecessor, and more than 20 points below that of Clinton or Reagan at this time. His successes have become albatrosses: Obamacare is used against him even though millions more are insured as a result. His administration has overseen the steady production of private sector jobs, and the jobless rate is lower now than before he was president, but still many feel little confidence in the economy. The wars he ended seem restarted, and the Middle East is a mess. Moreover, immigration and environmental reform is stalled, Dodd-Frank is criticized, and Gitmo is still open. Obama has seen government shutdowns, near defaults, and constant gridlock in Washington. As Neustadt would describe it, Obama has simply lost the power to persuade.
Obama has done a lot but has received little credit. Some of his problems are a Republican Party that refuses to cooperate. Some of it is racism. But much of it is self-inflicted. Some of it is simply doing a bad job managing reputation. Candidate Obama is a terrific communicator, President Obama is awful.
But part the problem is also substance. Many of his reforms were half-hearted at best, such as health care or banking reform. Even the stimulus was too small. Obama had the chance to be daring but blinked when it mattered. Obama lost the power to persuade in part because of his lack of experience — even in the first 100 days or first two years his success was more due to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid than him. Health care reform almost died before it was saved by Reid. Obama’s lack of experience, his unwillingness to fight, his failure to recognize that the world is not post-partisan and post-racial have cost him. It was his naiveté that cost him his ability to persuade. Some say Obama is gradually morphing into Bush, raising questions not about decisiveness, but competency.
If one just looks at Obama, it appears he has given up. He gives lackluster speeches, but no one listens. His party runs from him, former loyalists such as Hillary Clinton criticize him, and his Cabinet and senior advisers are gradually leaving. He was missing in action on Ferguson, Missouri, and his vacations at Martha’s Vineyard make it look like he is out of touch with real America. Regardless of what happens on Election Day, Obama’s next two years look like a further fading of his power and relevance.
Obama’s presidency is really a contradiction. It is a story of promise and failure and of hope for change and the reality of being captured by the past. It is also a story that really confirms Neustadt’s central claim that presidential power is that of persuasion. But somewhere along the line Obama has lost the power to persuade and even what he has accomplished has been obscured by his failures.
—————
David Schultz is a professor of political science at Hamline University in St. Paul.
