President Obama's State of the Nation: As Good as The West Wing?

Two days after the Presidential election, John Matlin ("Publius") posted an advance copy of Barack Obama's "State of the Union" message. Even though the Tuesday speech to Congress was labelled as "State of the Nation", John wasn't far off the mark with sentences like "Americans have faced dark days before. Using our ingenuity, know-how, willingness to work and sheer strength of character, we have won through."

Here is his assessment of the "real" State of the Nation statement by President Obama:

In one of those peculiarities of political protocol, Obama’s speech on Tuesday night to a joint session of Congress was “a Presidential address”, not a State of the Union message. Leaving aside the technical argument for constitutional lawyers --- did the President fulfil his obligations under Article II, Section 3 to “give to the Congress information of the State of the Union”? --- the better analogy might be that Obama gave the American equivalent of the Queen’s Speech to the British Parliament. This was an ambitious legislative programme, but it had little or no detail.

Sometimes observers of US Presidential politics allow themselves flights of fancy. In discussions of who is the best post-World War II Presidents, or indeed any president since 1865, Franklin D. Roosevelt invariably comes top. Since the 1990s, however, the name of Josiah Bartlet has always been high in the rankings. For those unfamiliar with US politics or culture, Bartlet was never one of the 43 men in the White House, but he did play the President on TV in The West Wing.

Both CNN and the New York Times have claimed that Obama’s speech harked back to the days of FDR and Lyndon Johnson, but it had many elements of vintage Jed Bartlet. Martin Sheen, Bartlet's alter ego, might have coached Obama in style and delivery --- at no time did Obama look like he was not in control of this American set-piece drama. Further, Obama’s suggestion that during the next decade, a cure for cancer will be found is, virtually, a direct lift from Series 3 of The West Wing. The only difference is that, at the last minute, President Bartlet decided it was step too far, even for him or scriptwriter Aaron Sorkin.

There is nothing wrong in an administration seeking a cure for cancer. It is a brilliant initiative. After all, one in three people in the West will suffer from the disease at some time in their lives. However, should not Obama have disclosed what resources he will put towards the goal?

Equally important, there are research institutes all over the world who are focused on bringing about the same result. Why not make it an aim for all such institutes to work together? Obama knows the subject is complex and there will be no single cure for all cancers. A combined effort might bring about speedier and less expensive solutions.

Obama pulled no punches in his speech. He proposed an activist government and busy legislative programme, presumably in an effort to position himself as a national leader in the face of continued Republican opposition. He directed much of his venom at the banks and bankers. However, his bromide about not spending a dollar of tax money on bankers was hollow. Bankers will be paid for their work, whether Obama likes it or not.

Obama brought vital issues of the budget deficits, dependence on foreign oil, global warming, the rising cost of healthcare, and the decline in education forward as matters of urgency, both for his administration and the American people. It is proper for him to do so. Previous administrations, dating back to Reagan, have in many respects either caused the problems or behaved like ostriches.

As usual, the devil will be in the detail. Some of the answers to questions of policy detail will be provided in the administration’s budget proposals published. It will be valuable to compare those proposals with Obama’s vision for America.