The Hurried President

When I was growing up, my parents were always keen to tell me to slow down – “don’t eat so fast,” “you’re mowing the grass too quickly” and, my favorite, “you are trying to clean your room too fast, slow down and do it right.”  I was taught that if one wanted to do something right, one could not hurry through.  When the Founding Fathers wrote the U.S. Constitution, they purposefully created a system that would require an inordinate amount of time to get through bills or conclude other measures.  The fear was that if it were easier to enact legislation or amendments to the Constitution, emotionalism and reactionary impulses would determine the direction of the country.  The time spent would also allow the government to consider all options to avoid going blindly towards a “solution.”  President Obama is not adhering to the wisdom of those who constructed our government. 

In 1975, while prime minister of India, Indira Gandhi sought to jail her opponents.  At the time, she said, in her defense, that while an opposition was a necessity in a democratic system, democracy dictates that the opposition should allow the government to follow its programs since they were the ones elected.  President Obama, over the course of his time in office, has taken a similar point of view.  Over and again, he has attempted to rush through or otherwise avoid discussion over key points of legislation while chanting his personal mantra, “Pass it now.”  In the construction of his Affordable Care Act, the bill was constructed without much transparency and the bill was ultimately passed without a full investigation and discussion on its various components.  Constantly, the president bemoaned a process that insists on deliberation and discourse.  The Senate Democrats ran roughshod over Republican concerns which, by the way, represented the concern of a large portion of the population, and passed it with little consensus and even smaller comprehension. 

A couple of years ago, the president demanded that his job works program be instituted immediately.  His State of the Union Address was littered with repeated calls for passage.  I do not believe that the former constitutional lawyer is unaware of the function and design of Congress; I’m just not sure he is interested in the detail investigation of his policies.  It is his hope that that repeated incantations of the misery of the unemployed will force his opponents to simply rubber stamp his vision in a wave of emotionalism.  In more recent days, he is doing the same with the various programs introduced by Vice President Joe Biden to curb gun violence.  It is does not matter whether the programs and policies will work because that is not the point.  Rather, the show of action is meant to be enough to mollify those demanding substantive change.  A few weeks ago, his attempt last year to push through appointees to the National Labor Relation Board without Senate confirmation was slapped down by a federal court as unconstitutional and has highlighted a disregard for the law he once was entrusted with teaching and has wasted a year’s worth of efforts by the NLRB. 

Many of the president’s defenders will say that the obdurate nature of the Republicans is preventing anything from being done and the president is forced to try and end run around the Congress, where his opponents also include Democrats.  At the same time, the president is quick to point out that the Republicans should be working with Democrats though it is difficult to do that when, at the same time, he tries to circumvent them.  I’m sure neither President Obama nor his supporters are interested in my assessment of his legacy but much of it will be based on his tendency to attempt to strong-arm legislation through.  It is not a tactic worthy of man so knowledgeable of the Constitution nor is it in keeping with the finer traditions of democracy.