- - Tuesday, January 28, 2014

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

President Obama was no doubt hoping his address to the nation Tuesday night would pull him out of the deepening political hole he’s been sinking into during the past year.

This clearly wasn’t the best time to say the State of the Union is strong. Not when the U.S. economy remains weak, stocks have taken a beating recently, millions of people are out of work, wages are stagnant, new-home sales fell for the second month in a row, and factory orders plunged in December by a shocking 4.3 percent.

The economic foundations of our country are crumbling. The government has fallen more deeply into debt than any other time in its history — to more than $17 trillion — as the president calls for more spending in the naive belief we can spend ourselves into prosperity.

It’s harder to find full-time employment. The once-mighty U.S. labor force has shrunk to record low levels as millions of long-term unemployed people have given up looking for jobs that do not exist.

Americans have turned depressingly pessimistic about the future of our country and their lives. Nearly two-thirds of our fellow citizens now think that “things have gotten pretty seriously off on the wrong track,” according to a poll released this week by The Washington Post.

Mr. Obama went before Congress last night to tell us how we’re doing as a country under his presidency, having just received a failing job-approval score that was lower than at the moment of any of his previous State of the Union addresses.

The Gallup Poll’s closely watched daily survey Monday reported that only 41 percent of Americans polled like the job he’s doing, while a muscular 52 percent disapprove of his performance as our nation’s chief executive.

The newspaper provided a more embarrassing report card on his presidency. Just 37 percent still “say they have either a good amount or a great deal of confidence in the president to make the right decisions for the country’s future,” and a hefty 63 percent said they do not.

At this point in the sixth year of their presidencies, Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan enjoyed 60 percent approval ratings, which Mr. Obama can only dream about.

A number of reports in the past week said that Mr. Obama and his advisers were struggling over his address, trying to come up with a new agenda to save his presidency and his party from expected losses in the November midterm elections. In an act of desperation, they have tried to make income inequality the central issue, coming up with old, warmed-over and discredited ideas such as boosting the minimum wage.

That idea has more often led to hard-pressed businesses finding ways to cut their payrolls, reducing the availability of entry-level jobs in which younger workers obtain necessary training and a pathway to future opportunities and higher incomes.

The growing gap between higher and lower incomes is the result of a weak economy in which there are fewer and fewer job opportunities to climb the economic ladder.

While Mr. Obama and his liberal accomplices are pushing for an agenda focused on income inequality, there is a lot of disagreement among administration advisers who want more concrete proposals. Mr. Obama still wants more infrastructure spending, but if the $800 billion stimulus check he got from a Democrat-controlled Congress early in his first term didn’t result in sustained, stronger economic growth, a few hundred billion more won’t do it, either.

Then there’s Mr. Obama’s all-purpose snake-oil remedy to raise taxes on the rich in order to expand social-welfare programs to help the unemployed. Even some of his party’s top political advisers have soured on that idea.

A divided Congress is not going to raise tax rates in a sluggish economy, and Democrats facing tough elections in the fall have privately told the White House they’re not going to support such an agenda.

“The American people are more concerned about how they are doing, as opposed to how someone else is doing. So simply saying, ‘We’re going to raise taxes on the wealthy’ is not going to be the kind of answer that satisfies the middle class,” says New York Sen. Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat.

This is the political conundrum Mr. Obama faces in the 2014 midterm election battlegrounds, where Republicans are widely expected to gain seats in the Senate, and, just possibly, win a majority.

He can talk all he wants about broadening economic opportunity, and no doubt has a few more executive orders up his sleeve in an attempt to do that. One of them, he says, is an executive order to raise the minimum wage for future federal contract workers to $10.10. It will have little or no effect on the economy as a whole.

He knows he can’t get his larger-spending agenda to first base on Capitol Hill — not with a monstrous federal debt outracing the economy’s growth rate.

Mr. Obama heads into the sixth year of his presidency selling the same threadbare economic agenda he’s been peddling for the past five years, but with little or no success.

“We hope that he does not dwell on the success of this economy,” Democratic political analysts James Carville and Stan Greenberg warned the president in a memorandum just before his address. Mr. Obama may think that this plays well among the base of his party, “but it’s not felt at the grocery story,” they cautioned.

The Republicans are going to pound Democrats on the economy and the lack of well-paying, full-time jobs in this year’s campaigns, and offer a new tax-incentive agenda for venture-capital investment, new business growth and expanded employment opportunities.

To resurrect a term Mr. Obama used to describe his party’s defeat in the 2010 midterm elections, the Democrats are in for another “shellacking.”

Donald Lambro is a syndicated columnist and contributor to The Washington Times.

Copyright © 2016 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Click to Read More

Click to Hide