Has Obama Quit Already?

Judging by his plans for job creation and deficit
reduction, the president has given up on policy accomplishments in favor
of playing politics

recent columns

• Is there electoral gold in Solyndra?
• Showdown at the Reagan corral
• Better safe than sorry

see all columns

The last few weeks of polling data have been
so bad for Barack Obama that pundits have begun speculating whether the
president might simply decide not to run for a second term in 2012.
Still, many question whether Obama could truly bring himself to walk
away from the world's most powerful executive position, even if it
became clear that he couldn't win in 2012 — and that his presence on the ticket might damage Democrats running in Senate and House races below him on the ticket.

However, the real question is whether Obama has essentially quit already.

Obama has offered two major proposals this month in an attempt to
change the narrative, to reverse the perception that his presidency is
floundering with the poor economy. The first proposal deals with job
creation, which is how most Americans gauge economic success. The
president had not offered any new thoughts on job creation since the
first stimulus package, instead issuing a series of predictions that
massive job creation was just around the corner. Vice President Joe
Biden spent the spring of 2010 talking about a "Summer of Recovery" that
never arrived, and by the summer of 2011, job creation stopped
entirely — with zero net jobs created in August.

That put pressure on the president to come up with a new plan, and
the White House started generating plenty of buzz by hyping Obama's work
in August for a new plan in September. They raised expectations for a
game-changer by insisting on unveiling the plan at a joint session of
Congress. Instead of offering a new plan, however, Obama gave an
ambiguous sketch of a plan. It took the White House several more days to
actually deliver the proposal to Capitol Hill, along with its $447
billion price tag.

The president has more than a year to go
before the next election, but Obama has stopped governing and has
shifted entirely to campaign mode.

The plan itself broke no new ground. Indeed, it closely resembles the
2009 stimulus bill, with its mix of infrastructure spending, temporary
tax breaks, and another round of bailouts for states. But if the
rehashed jobs plan was a passive disappointment, Obama's new deficit
reduction plan is an aggressive partisan attack — the very kind that
Obama blasted in his joint-session speech
earlier in the month. Obama warned his political opponents that voters
wouldn't wait for an election 14 months away to deliver solutions, and
that Democrats and Republicans had to work together now to solve the big
problems facing the nation:

"Already, we're seeing the same old press releases and tweets flying
back and forth. Already, the media has proclaimed that it's impossible
to bridge our differences. And maybe some of you have decided that those
differences are so great that we can only resolve them at the ballot
box. But know this: The next election is 14 months away. And the people
who sent us here — the people who hired us to work for them — they don't have the luxury of waiting 14 months. "

Instead of working with Republicans to craft a deficit-reduction plan
that could pass Congress, Obama instead filled his with tax hikes that
even his own party rejected in 2009 and 2010 in the effort to fund
Obama's signature health-care overhaul bill. Our colleague David Frum calls it a "stunt" that would derail economic growth, if it ever had a prayer of passing the House. Democratic strategist Mark Penn wonders at The Huffington Post
why Obama would want to turn himself into another Walter Mondale — and
also why Obama passed on the opportunity to work on comprehensive tax
reform with Republicans rather than get stuck in "the thicket of class
warfare." Why not work on co-opting a big Republican issue as Bill
Clinton did with welfare reform, Penn asks, and seize the mantle of
leadership?

Penn wonders why Obama didn't think to work with House Republicans on
deficit reduction, but he might have asked why Obama didn't bother to
work with Senate Democrats on the jobs bill, either. The White House
apparently forgot to consult with its own allies in the upper chamber
when writing the rerun of the 2009 stimulus bill, only to discover to
their embarrassment that it won't pass the Senate. At least six Senate
Democrats have gone on the record in the media expressing opposition to
passing it in its current form, and not just purple-state incumbents up
for tough re-election fights (like Joe Manchin and Robert Casey), but
also those in relatively safe seats like Tom Carper (Delaware) and
Barbara Mikulski (Maryland). Even Dianne Feinstein in solid-blue
California talked to the media about her concerns over the cost and
effectiveness of Obama's plan.

Obama mailed in both proposals rather than engage in the hard work of
governance. If Obama had any interest in actually passing his
deficit-reduction plan, he would not have filled it with tax hikes that
have floated around the Beltway for years — and which both Republicans
and Democrats have rejected in the past. The jobs bill was even less
creative than his approach to deficit reduction, cribbed from a failed
and costly exercise in central economic control. Obama didn't bother to
put much effort into either because he has no intention of doing the
hard work needed to accomplish actual deficit reduction or improve the
job-creation climate. The president has more than a year to go before
the next election, but Obama has stopped governing and has shifted
entirely to campaign mode. This is what it looks like when a president
quits.