GOP burns bipartisan president

Posted: October 17, 2010

Amplified by the right-wing message machine, Republicans paint President Obama as an unyielding left-winger, an unreconstructed liberal who refuses to compromise. The president's critics have turned the truth inside out: One of Obama's greatest political weaknesses has been his stubborn - and unrequited - love for bipartisanship.

The president has made some of his biggest mistakes trying to woo a GOP opposition that has committed itself to frustrating him at every turn. If he had ignored recalcitrant Republicans, for example, his health-care legislation might have become law without months of damaging political drama.

In an interview last week in his West Wing office, David Axelrod, one of Obama's closest advisers, acknowledged that the administration had been surprised by the unified Republican resistance to the president's agenda.

"Well, I think we miscalculated," Axelrod said. "We had the idea that, particularly in a time of national crisis, there would be more of an inclination to work together.

"One of the bracing moments was when the president was on his way over ... to Capitol Hill to talk to the Republican House caucus about the Recovery Act. They issued a press release while he was on his way over to say that they were going to vote en masse against it. And that was a signal ... of things to come."

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act passed in February 2009 without a single vote from a Republican in the House and the backing of just three in the Senate, even though nearly a third of it came in the form of tax cuts - usually a GOP tool for fixing anything. Most economists have credited the stimulus package with creating jobs and helping to end the recession, but Republicans continue to denounce it as a boondoggle that blew a hole in the federal budget.

"I think the Republicans have been diabolically clever about how they've portrayed this," Axelrod conceded. "They stood on the sidelines and made a decision that 'We're going to let him wrestle with this mess that we created. And then in two years we can try and hang him with it.'"

After the stimulus, Obama and his Democratic allies tried to negotiate with GOP leaders on health-insurance reform - a decision that gave critics time to mischaracterize the proposal and gin up opposition. Remember death panels? Government-funded abortions? Rationing?

Still, Obama kept going back with proposals meant to lure a few Republican votes for his agenda. That led to his disastrous announcement, just weeks before the Deepwater Horizon explosion, to expand offshore drilling.

While Axelrod denied that the announcement amounted to a quid pro quo, Obama clearly believed that Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) and other GOP senators would, in exchange, support energy legislation that included a price on carbon emissions.

Obama didn't get what he bargained for. The months-long environmental disaster dominated news coverage, obscured the president's work on the economy, and gave his critics more fodder to claim his administration is incompetent. And, since the accident forced the White House to tiptoe away from its embrace of offshore drilling, it also provided Graham an excuse to back away from energy legislation.

A naive expectation of cooperation hasn't been Obama's only mistake. He waited until the last moment to try to inspire his base for the midterms. Unlike Ronald Reagan, Obama didn't take every possible opportunity to pin the economic mess on his predecessor. Nor did the president tamp down the expectations generated by his historic election. That has proved costly, as was clear during the president's encounter with the "exhausted" Velma Hart, a supporter who questioned him during a recent town hall meeting.

"There's no doubt that part of what we've encountered is the mismatch between very, very high expectations and the magnitude of the problems that we've been called upon to solve," Axelrod said.

But the expected GOP gains in the coming midterms may solve one of Obama's problems: his misplaced faith in logic, persuasion, and cooperation in the national interest. Tea-party-fueled anger has produced a wave of GOP candidates for whom the word compromise is akin to treason. There can be no miscalculation about their intentions.

Cynthia Tucker is an Atlanta Journal Constitution columnist. E-mail her at

comments powered by Disqus