Subject: Great Halperin Column
From: "Eric Schwerin" <[email-masked]>
To: "Hunter Biden" <[email-masked]>, "Beau Biden" <[email-masked]>, "Missy Owens" <[email-masked]>, "David and Joan Schwerin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 09:04:47 -0500

ONE NATION
The Secrets of Obama's Underappreciated Success
By MARK HALPERIN Monday, Apr. 26, 2010

Jewel Samad / AFP / Getty
PrintEmail DiggFacebookYahoo BuzzTwitter
MORE

Barack Obama's right-wing opponents have cast him as a socialist  
failure. His left-wing hecklers see him as an over-cautious hedger.  
But, critics notwithstanding, President Obama is on the path to be a  
huge success by the time of November's midterm elections.

Before the Right jabbers (what about the huge debt, the broken tax  
pledge, the paucity of overseas accomplishments?), the Left yammers  
(Guantanamo hasn't been closed, gays aren't serving openly in the  
military, too many policies cater to business interests!), and the  
media chides (POTUS and party poll numbers are down, Washington is  
more partisan than ever), look at the two key metrics that underscore  
Obama's accomplishments. It is too early to assess the ultimate  
measure of victory — whether the President's actions have been  
prudent and beneficial, domestically and internationally. But by  
Election Day, 2010, Obama will have soundly achieved many of his chief  
campaign promises while running a highly competent, scandal-free  
government. Not bad for a guy whose opponents (in both parties) for  
the White House suggested he was too green in national life to know  
how to do the job — and whose presidency began in the midst of a  
worldwide economic crisis that demanded urgent attention and commanded  
much of his focus.
(See "Obama's Troubled First Year: Grading Him on the Key Issues.")

Let's start with the competence Obama has shown. As he proved in the  
campaign, he is a master of personnel decisions, choosing people who  
are excellent at what they do, but also requiring that they play  
nicely with others. In the two most vital areas, national security and  
economic policy, all the President's women and men generally get along  
well and have had critical roles in advancing the agenda. It is true  
that the economic team in particular has some rivalries, and the  
administration still hasn't figured out how to overcome its  
collectively weak public communications skills on the economy. But  
overall, the White House is populated by hard workers who are rowing  
in unison to advance the cause, and rarely take their disagreements  
public through damaging leaks.

Obama's two best personnel decisions were probably the two men serving  
right below him — Vice President Joe Biden and White House Chief of  
Staff Rahm Emanuel. Yes, Biden still falls victim to caricature as an  
irrepressible bigmouth and is the butt of late-night jokes. And  
Emanuel can be overly brash and flutter nerves both on Capitol Hill  
and among administration allies. But Obama knew what he was getting in  
both men and they have performed up to or above his expectations. With  
West Wing offices right across the hall from each other, Biden and  
Emanuel often work in tandem, each doing more heavy lifting than is  
publicly seen or commonly known. Obama — who proved during the  
campaign that he knows how to maintain full control of his operation  
without micro-managing — sets the tone and overall goals, and then  
allows his Veep and his Chief, along with other senior advisers, to  
execute the plans.
(See who's who in Barack Obama's White House.)

Biden has traveled extensively overseas and around the country and  
helped to coordinate both national security policy and congressional  
strategy, while dealing with governors and mayors on the economy.  
Politically, he is expected to be an asset in the midterms, as he was  
in 2008, with the kind of white working class voters who appreciate  
his homely truths and affable manner, and who still haven't warmed to  
Obama.

As for Emanuel, Obama was intent on selecting a tough, competitive,  
savvy chief of staff, one able to use the levers of power to advance  
an agenda through both legislation and executive action. Emanuel  
unexpectedly found himself in the spotlight last week when he appeared  
on "Charlie Rose" and repeated his oft-expressed interest in one day  
serving as mayor of Chicago. The press flew into a frenzy, and some  
pundits deemed the remark an unseemly display of ambition. It was, in  
fact, a reminder of Emanuel's deep ties to his hometown, his  
reluctance to leave his job as a member of Congress to join the  
administration — part of the House leadership, Emanuel was on a  
direct path to be the Speaker within a decade — and his willingness  
to bow to Obama's wishes and jettison his long-term plans in order to  
manage the White House.
(See "Obama After a Year: What's Changed, and What Hasn't.")

Emanuel's hand (and his six years of experience in the Clinton  
Administration) can be seen in many facets of the operational success.  
The White House controls the Washington and media agenda most days,  
carefully coordinating with Capitol Hill and interest groups partners.  
Bad news is not allowed to fester. And the greatest asset, the  
President himself, is deployed with strategic planning and tactical  
nimbleness.

It's easy to forget what circumstances could be like, what problems  
Obama might have encountered. Think back just a few years ago, to the  
last time a young Democrat was swept into the White House on a message  
of change. Unlike Bill Clinton, especially early in his own  
presidency, Obama has largely maintained control of his public image  
and preserved the majesty of the office (harder than for any other  
previous president ever because of the toxic Freak Show nature of our  
politico-media culture), and maintained good relations, in public and  
in private, with the armed services brass, the intelligence community,  
and law enforcement.

The passage of health care and the pledge to help Democrats wherever  
possible with fundraising and political assistance has (for now at  
least) quieted the Capitol Hill voices that until recently were  
questioning the White House's competence and commitment. Control of  
Congress makes things easier, for sure, but so does an absence of  
indicted, disgraced, or bungling appointees.
(See the 5 things to watch at Obama's health care summit.)

Over the past sixteen months, both Biden and Emanuel have expressed  
concern internally that Obama has been too bold, risking his  
presidency on big bets. But those disagreements with the President  
have been fleeting and mostly futile — and, as it happens,  
unwarranted. So far, most of Obama's big bets have paid off.

Health care's passage is of course the White House's signal  
achievement, accomplished without revealing the administration's full  
cognizance (thanks to internal polling and focus groups) of the  
legislation's stark unpopularity among the public. But beyond health  
care, Obama acted decisively to stop the world from going into  
economic depression, after inheriting a mess from his predecessor.  
Quibble all you wish about the dimensions of the stimulus law or the  
administration of the TARP or the Detroit bailout, but the actions  
taken were professionally handled, apparently necessary, and, so far,  
constructive. Strikingly underrated by the Washington press corps are  
Obama's gains on education policy, including a willingness to confront  
the education establishment on standards for both teachers and  
students. Overseas, Obama has snagged an arms reduction deal with  
Russia, managed the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq exactly as he  
promised, eliminated numerous terrorist leaders through an aggressive  
targeting operation, and laid the groundwork for dealing with Iran  
and, perhaps, North Korea.
(See the five immediate benefits of health reform.)

In the months ahead, the President will likely pass a financial  
regulation overhaul (despite this weekend's snags); manage the  
confirmation of a second Supreme Court nominee with relatively little  
commotion; announce the reduction of the American troop level in Iraq  
to around 50,000; showcase the under-covered gains on education  
reform; take advantage of the improving economy to tout his stimulus  
efforts; and sharpen his "Obama-Biden future versus Bush-Cheney past"  
argument to help stave off massive Democratic losses in November. He  
also has a decent chance to pass a small-to-medium-sized energy bill.  
True, some promises, such as comprehensive immigration reform, will  
remain undone, but most of his major goals will be completed or well  
underway.

And after the midterms, assuming the President needs a game-changing  
move in the wake of significant losses, Emanuel has already played a  
clever bit of inside-baseball, installing his old friend and Clinton  
Administration ally Bruce Reid as the staff director of the bipartisan  
deficit reduction commission that is due to make recommendations in  
December. If there are big Republican electoral gains, expect the  
analysis from conservatives and the media to be that the country  
wanted a check on big spending from Washington. That overriding  
concern could shape the outcome more than any of Obama's  
accomplishments or any appreciation for the job he has done for the  
last two years. The commission's proposals can then be coordinated  
with an "I get it" message from Obama, providing a bold opening to the  
second half of his first term as he sets about tackling another  
campaign promise — long-term deficit reduction. A difficult pledge to  
achieve perhaps, but, given the president's track record, one that  
shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.

Eric D. Schwerin
[email-masked]

Sent from my iPhone