Share

What "Only a Nation Can Do"

by: Isaiah J. Poole  |  The Campaign For America's Future

photo
President Obama speaks to a crowd in Springfield, Illinois, on February 12, Abraham Lincoln's birthday. (Photo: Reuters)

    As Sen. Judd Gregg confirmed that he would stay in the fold of conservative Republican obstructionists in the Senate instead of in President Obama's cabinet, Obama himself laid out a progressive vision of government that fundamentally rejects President Reagan's government-is-the-problem mindset. It was a vision that Gregg apparently could not embrace.

    When Sen. Judd Gregg finally decided this week that he should stay in the fold of conservative Republican obstructionists in the Senate rather than on the side of moving the country forward, it was apparent he could not bring himself to embrace the progressive vision of government that President Obama laid out at at a Lincoln Day commemoration Thursday night.

    Even as Obama engages in overtures to the right that have been more often than not maddening and counterproductive, it is important to remember that at his ideological core Obama has made the most dramatic break in a generation from the government-is-the-problem ideology of Ronald Reagan.

    The contrast between Obama's speech at the Abraham Lincoln Association annual banquet [1] in Springfield, Ill., and Reagan's 1981 inaugural address [2] is striking:

    Reagan, talking about the crushing combination of recession and inflation that he faced as he became president:

    In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. From time to time we've been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people....
    If we look to the answer as to why for so many years we achieved so much, prospered as no other people on earth, it was because here in this land we unleashed the energy and individual genius of man to a greater extent than has ever been done before.... It is no coincidence that our present troubles parallel and are proportionate to the intervention and intrusion in our lives that result from unnecessary and excessive growth of government.

    Obama, addressing an even deeper economic crisis, reached back to President Lincoln:

    "The legitimate object of government," he wrote, "is to do for the people what needs to be done, but which they cannot, by individual effort, do at all, or do so well, by themselves."
    To do for the people what needs to be done but which they cannot do on their own. It's a simple statement. But it answers a central question of Abraham Lincoln's life. Why did he land on the side of union? What was it that made him so unrelenting in pursuit of victory that he was willing to test the Constitution he ultimately preserved? What was it that led this man to give his last full measure of devotion so that our nation might endure?
    ... I suspect that his devotion to the idea of union came not from a belief that government always had the answer. It came not from a failure to understand our individual rights and responsibilities.... He recognized that while each of us must do our part, work as hard as we can, be as responsible as we can, although we are responsible for our own fates, in the end, there are certain things we cannot do on our own. There are certain things we can only do together. There are certain things only a union can do.

    From this way of thinking, Obama said, came the Homestead Act, land-grant colleges, the intercontinental railroad, the creation of a National Academy of Sciences, and the later policy initiatives that helped lift the nation out of the Great Depression and, through the GI Bill after World War II, sparked the creation of the modern middle class. These were successes that Reagan could not bring himself to champion in his first speech as president.

    While agreeing that government in past eras has "at times done things that people can-and should-do for themselves," Obama said conservatism has taken us too far in the opposite direction:

    What's dominated is a philosophy that says every problem can be solved if only government would step out of the way; that if government were just dismantled and divvied up into tax breaks, that it would somehow benefit us all. Such knee-jerk disdain for government - this constant rejection of any common endeavor - cannot rebuild our levees or our roads or our bridges. It can't refurbish our schools or modernize our health care system. It can't lead to the next medical discovery or yield the research and technology that will spark a clean energy economy.
    Only a nation can do those things. Only by coming together, all of us, in union, and expressing that sense of shared sacrifice and responsibility - for ourselves, yes, but also for one another - can we do the work that must be done in this country. That is part of the definition of being American.

    Reagan, to be fair, in his inaugural speech gave a nod to "making government work," but he saw government as a beast to be constrained, a foe to be vanquished, not an asset that belongs to the people that can and must be harnessed to work for our collective good - to, as Obama said in his speech, rebuild the economy so that workers can find jobs and businesses can find capital, so that we have clean energy to fuel homes and industry, so that we have schools that prepare our children for tomorrow's competitive global landscape. Obama summed it up this way:

    It's only by coming together to do what people need done that we will, in Lincoln's words, "lift artificial weights from all shoulders [and give] an unfettered start, and a fair chance, in the race of life." That's all people are looking for, a fair chance in the race of life.

    In the coming days, Obama will have tremendous political challenges building on the economic recovery package he is expected to sign next week. Not only will there be battles over the 2010 budget, but the long-term battle to define "fiscal responsibility" beyond the current crisis, in which the vision of the Judd Greggs of the world - limit government in both its size and vision, and continue to to cast it as an enemy of individual liberty - must confront the vision Obama laid out of a government that sees itself as the vehicle we the people use to ensure we all have that fair chance in the race of life. Obama will need lots of support - and occasional prodding - to keep true to this sea-change in the country's ideological direction.

    --------

    Links:

    [1] www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-the-President-at-the-102nd-Abraham-Lincoln-Association-Annual-Banquet

    [2] www.reaganfoundation.org/reagan/speeches/first.asphttp://www.reaganfoundation.org/reagan/speeches/first.asp

  

»


Comments

This is a moderated forum.  It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

" ...That's all people are

" ...That's all people are looking for, a fair chance in the race of life." hmmm...life is not a 'race', but laissez faire capitalism makes it so because people are conditioned ('educated')in such a way i.e. the cult of the individual etc., so that a 'leave it alone' unregulated marketplace tends to degenerate into a power struggle and basically a 'law of the jungle' type atmosphere. maybe we wouldn't need government if people truly lived in way that manifestly realized this concept of the 'other' as patently false. this would spread peace and prosperity to all making boundaries, walls and weapons obsolete. '...you may call me a dreamer but i'm not the only one..." yet until then i think obama's way is the way to go.

Anyone believing government

Anyone believing government is the problem must resign. It's the old adage, "Lead, follow, or get out of the way." We need all the committed, serious, competent government leaders we can get. Speed bumps need not serve.

Obama is right that only a

Obama is right that only a nation can address problems as critical as the "financial meltdown," health, education, the energy crisis, global warming--the list goes on. But if anyone saw Bill Moyers last week interviewing Johnson they had to question Obama's appointment of Tim Geithner. Geithner's got to go. I believe Paul Krugman is right: the stimulus package is not big enough. It's not going to do the job in time for the 2010 elections. These are big mistakes Obama is making and they are going to come back to haunt us all.

I certainly hope Poole is

I certainly hope Poole is right, and President Obama believes that government has a positive role to play in the lives of the people. What I cannot understand is why, then, does President Obama waste time trying to convert those right wing Republicans whose ideology disables them from ever agreeing with him on anything. We don't have the luxury of time, and no debate will ever convince Republicans to change their views. Why should they, after all? Stop wasting time, Mr. President, with diversions into non-un-anti-partisanship. There is nothing wrong with differing opinions and agendas. Just move along with the progressive one that got you elected.

So Reagan accepted

So Reagan accepted government as broken and did nothing to fix it after becoming President, he drove a wedge right through the heart of America, giving rise to a bitter conservative/liberal divide.

Government is only the

Government is only the problem when it provides no oversight, breaks the law, steals from the poor to give to the rich, provides shoddy education, and is constantly engaged in many stupid endless wars. All the things the Republicans gave us. Government isn't the problem, it's the Repulicants. If they are against government, what are they for? Anarchy? That's pretty much what the military industrial media complex is about.

I do like the idea of "speed

I do like the idea of "speed bumps" taking leave of government service either voluntarily or by losing elections. It is time to build an educated nation that can expand the knowledge of everyone to deal with the 21st century not look back to the 19th century. It is time for a new Party to rise from the incompetencies of both Parties to lead the way. Or one to take in the worst of both and be called the Santimonius Prig Party.

I agree with President Obama

I agree with President Obama - Only a nation can do this. Not individual political parties nor special interests nor private individuals, but all of us working together to create a real nation, bound not by words, but by deeds; and not deeds of great importance, but deeds that reach out to our neighbors and help create communities that work together to create balanced, sustainable changes by changing who we are as a people. Once we thought nothing of helping our neighbors or those less fortunate, but we have forgotten that to our peril. It is important that we no longer say "Not in my backyard", but rather "here, let me share my backyard with you." We used to dream the American Dream was possible for all, but we have forgotten that it was for ALL, not just for ME. When we accept that the Republican philosophy of ME and MINE FIRST is basically wrong, then we can start working towards YOURS and OURS as ways of finding this nation's true heritage again. I think Obama wants to do this, and we must all help him now, because we no longer have the luxury of time - the Republicans saw to that.