tag:theconversation.com,2011:/fr/topics/2015-state-of-the-union-14495/articles2015 state of the union – The Conversation2015-01-27T03:00:30Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/366002015-01-27T03:00:30Z2015-01-27T03:00:30ZObama’s ‘middle-class economics’ reminiscent of Rudd and Keating<p>Barack Obama’s State of the Union address last week was important for both policy and political reasons. In it, Obama argued for a more egalitarian “middle-class economics”. In the process, he prepared the ground for the anticipated 2016 Hillary Clinton presidential campaign and began to force the Republicans further to the right.</p>
<p>It also didn’t hurt that Obama seemed to have the Republicans’ psychological number: When the assembled Republican legislators cheered his observation that he had “no more campaigns to run”, he baited them in reply, “I know because I won both of them.” </p>
<p>But more was going on in this address than just political one-upmanship. In policy terms, the 2015 State of the Union can be seen as representing Obama’s first post-Global Financial Crisis address. </p>
<p>Consider that following six years dominated by efforts to recover from the GFC, the US has finally begun to approach full employment: 2014 was the best year for hiring in 15 years. In January 2015 the jobless rate hit 5.6%. By comparison, in 2014, Australian unemployment continued its steady increase, reaching 6.1% in December 2014.</p>
<p>This shift was evident in Obama’s State of the Union rhetoric. In the immediate aftermath of the GFC, Obama had faced a rhetorical policy dilemma.</p>
<p>On the one hand, he campaigned in 2008 on a platform of reform. Indeed, as the economy continued its early-2009 freefall – with more than 800,000 jobs lost in January 2009 alone – Obama essentially “doubled down” in rhetorical terms. For example, after revelations of executive pay abuses at firms like AIG - which had received billions in government aid - Obama urged caps on executive pay and an array of controls. </p>
<p>On the other hand, he also would grow concerned that such initiatives might threaten the confidence necessary for recovery. So he ultimately held back on many of his promised reforms. In short, Obama was worried about economic confidence and repeatedly warned that any reforms must – as he put it in April 2009 at Georgetown University – “do no harm” to recovery. </p>
<p>Six years of struggle, however, do make a difference. With the US economy back on its feet, the Obama of 2015 has returned to his earlier reformist stance. This was reflected in his State of the Union assertion that “we need to set our sights higher than just making sure government doesn’t screw things up … We need to do more than just do no harm.”</p>
<p>No longer does the need to “do no harm” translate into an aversion to doing anything at all.</p>
<h2>The Australian parallels</h2>
<p>In policy terms, this led Obama to issue his State of the Union call for a “middle-class economics”. He defined this agenda more specifically as embodying a stress on services for “working families” - a phrase used with much success in 2007 by Kevin Rudd. </p>
<p>Giving meaning to this notion, Obama unveiled a package of middle-class-focused reforms: these encompassed subsidies for childcare, provisions for maternity and sick leave, a plan to make community college free, and infrastructure investment. All told, Obama proposed US$235 billion in new spending, to be funded through US$320 billion in tax increases.</p>
<p>These proposals are unlikely to get through the Republican-controlled congress. In this light, one might ask: what’s the point? While Obama may eke out a bit of legislation, his dual concerns are best seen as pre-positioning the Hillary Clinton campaign for a centrist offensive, while driving the Republican Party to the right. </p>
<p>Indeed, it is a time-honoured process, one Hillary herself no doubt appreciates. In the 1992 campaign, following decades in which the Democratic Party had been seen as a party of “special interests”, Bill Clinton succeeded in recasting his party as one that would “put people first” – and so defend the middle class against pro-business Republicans. Only a year later, Paul Keating would ride a similar tack to victory over John Hewson’s ideological Fightback! package. Four years later and Tony Blair would similarly box out British conservatives.</p>
<p>In turn, in this light, Obama can be seen as seeking to drive a wedge between moderate, pro-business Republicans and their Tea Party brethren. Having occupied the middle, he now seeks to fracture the opposition. Indeed, initial Republican reactions to the address would suggest that he is succeeding. Not only Tea Party types but also party moderates moved to condemn his appeals as divisive.</p>
<p>Moderate front-runner Jeb Bush lamented: “It’s really sad that President Obama wants to use the tax code once again to divide us.” Mitt Romney likewise condemned “bridge to nowhere’ proposals”. Tea Party favourite Rand Paul offered a sharper critique, suggesting that: “The President is intent on redistributing the pie, but not growing it.” </p>
<p>While each of these stances may please the party faithful, they may lack broader resonance. This helps explain why Hillary Clinton continues to lead every likely Republican challenger in recent polls. </p>
<p>In short, two years is a long time in politics, but Obama’s 2015 State of the Union address provides a policy foundation for political success in 2016.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/36600/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Wesley Widmaier receives funding from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p>Barack Obama’s State of the Union address last week was important for both policy and political reasons. In it, Obama argued for a more egalitarian “middle-class economics”. In the process, he prepared…Wesley Widmaier, Australian Research Council Future Fellow, Griffith UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/366352015-01-26T10:48:24Z2015-01-26T10:48:24ZObama’s middle-class economics: where’s the affordable housing?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/69957/original/image-20150125-24515-1hv22p9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">MIA from US housing policy.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>President Barack Obama, in his annual address to the country last week, <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-tonight-we-turn-the-page/">stressed the importance</a> of keeping “the dream of homeownership alive for future generations of Americans.” One of the main ways he plans to do that involves lowering mortgage premiums. </p>
<p>Renters, who make up <a href="http://www.census.gov/housing/hvs/files/currenthvspress.pdf">about 35% of American households</a>, as usual were left out in the cold. </p>
<p>Although the speech stressed the importance of “helping folks” afford a home, Obama never mentioned the importance of helping them find an affordable one, regardless of whether it’s rented or owned. Simply put, renters are largely invisible in federal housing initiatives.</p>
<p>Instead, middle-class families were encouraged to plunge further into debt to chase the dream of homeownership. So much for “middle-class economics.”</p>
<h2>Still waiting to recover</h2>
<p>It has been more than 30 years since a president mentioned the need to increase affordable housing in a State of the Union address. In 1981, just days before he left office, Jimmy Carter argued that more money needed to be spent on rental vouchers and public housing. Since then, presidents have extolled the benefits of homeownership but have been unwilling to acknowledge why so many middle-class renters are unwilling or unable to buy houses.</p>
<p>While wealthy American households can buy homes because most have recovered from the financial crisis, most households are still waiting to bounce back. </p>
<p>According to the <a href="http://www.federalreserve.gov/econresdata/scf/scfindex.htm">Federal Reserve’s 2013 Survey of Consumer Finances</a>, income and wealth for the top 3% of US families rose to historically high levels in 2013. The increase in income for wealthy households, however, is like a reverse mirror of the declines experienced by the bottom 90%.</p>
<p>Income for all workers, except the highest earners, has been stagnant for more than 30 years. Census data show that, adjusted for inflation, average family income is about the same now as it was in 1995. </p>
<p>Although parts of Obama’s middle-class economics plan will likely help middle-class workers, in his words, “feel more secure in a world of constant change,” the housing initiative fails to respond to the primary reasons they are not buying homes.</p>
<p>Middle-income households are not buying homes because they cannot afford to. </p>
<h2>The wrong plan to change this</h2>
<p>Under Obama’s plan, the Federal Housing Administration will reduce its mortgage insurance premiums by 0.5% at the end of January. This reduction is supposed to make it easier for Americans to buy homes.</p>
<p>A slight discount in insurance premiums, however, won’t do the trick for most households. Homeownership will continue to be a wealth-building device for higher-income Americans because they can afford to save for a down payment and qualify for a low-cost mortgage loan. </p>
<p>But, if you can’t save enough for a down payment, you can’t take advantage of one of the main and most expensive ways - at $70 billion a year - the government tries to make housing affordable: the mortgage interest deduction. </p>
<p>Since most taxpayers do not itemize their tax deductions, most don’t benefit. Data from the Joint Committee on Taxation and other tax policy groups consistently show that only <a href="https://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=4516">one-third of taxpayers itemize</a> and that only 25% <a href="https://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=4506">claim the mortgage interest deduction</a>. </p>
<h2>Rising unaffordability</h2>
<p>Meanwhile housing is becoming ever more unaffordable.</p>
<p>More than one-third of all US households cannot afford their homes, based on the traditional standard that housing costs consume no more than 30% of income, according to the <a href="http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/research/state_nations_housing">State of the Nation’s Housing 2014</a>, prepared by the Harvard University Joint Center for Housing Studies (JCHS). </p>
<p>The report found that the number of households who could not afford their housing jumped from 29.6% in 2001 to an all-time high of 37.2% in 2010, a year after the recession officially ended.</p>
<p>Renters continue to face a housing affordability crisis mostly because of stagnant income. The JCHS study noted that median renter incomes were 13% lower in 2012 (more than three years after the recession) than in 2001. And at the same time as incomes were falling, median rents were increasing, by about 4% in the period. The <a href="http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/bulletin/2014/pdf/scf14.pdf">Federal Reserve Survey</a> found that families in the bottom 10% saw “substantial declines in real net worth” from 2010 to 2013.</p>
<p>Just as Obama accurately observed that it is impossible for workers who earn the federal minimum wage to “work full time and support a family on less than $15,000 a year,” it has now become virtually impossible for many lower- and middle-income renters to afford to buy houses on the wages they receive. </p>
<p>More than 80% of the families who earn the federal minimum wage spent more than 30% of their income on housing expenses in 2012, according to the JCHS study. Almost 70% spent more than 50% of their income on housing.</p>
<h2>Focus on affordability for all, not just homeowners</h2>
<p>Middle-income, and especially lower-income, households do not need to hear another speech that proposes relief for homeowners. They need a speech that announces a plan to help improve their housing security by providing more affordable housing, whether rented or owned. </p>
<p>Policymakers need to develop housing policies that make the middle-class visible. For example, shouldn’t Congress finally be willing to modify, if not repeal, the mortgage interest deduction? Although politically influential groups like the National Association of Home Builders and the National Association of Realtors <a href="http://www.realtor.org/topics/home-ownership-matters">routinely lobby</a> against any attempts to modify this deduction, it is undisputed that this deduction disproportionately benefits higher-income homeowners.</p>
<p>A middle-class economics housing policy also would consider ways to develop housing tax deductions, credits, or subsidies that would encourage Americans to own homes communally, jointly or cooperatively. </p>
<p>Finally, legislators need to create housing policies that help Americans save for a security deposit for a rental home, just as state and federal programs provide down payment assistance to help renters buy homes.</p>
<p>In declaring national housing policies more than 50 years ago, <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1441">Congress stated</a> “that the general welfare and security of the Nation and the health and living standards of its people require … the realization as soon as feasible of the goal of a decent home and a suitable living environment for every American family.”</p>
<p>We have not achieved those goals. And if US housing policies continue to ignore why middle-class Americans cannot and will not buy homes, we will never achieve them.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/36635/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mechele Dickerson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>President Barack Obama, in his annual address to the country last week, stressed the importance of keeping “the dream of homeownership alive for future generations of Americans.” One of the main ways he…Mechele Dickerson, Chair in Bankruptcy Law and Practice, The University of Texas at AustinLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/363532015-01-21T17:34:58Z2015-01-21T17:34:58ZThe State of the Union 2015 – theater, traditions, politics<p><em>Editor’s note: “The state of the union is good,” and the attitude of President Barack Obama in his annual speech to Congress was upbeat. Good economic news and no more election campaigns were the backdrop to the president’s “<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/21/us/state-of-the-union-obama-ambitious-agenda-to-help-middle-class.html?ribbon-ad-idx=3&rref=homepage">ambitious agenda</a>” and “<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/?reload=true">assertive”</a> call to action. Here scholars from around the US give their reactions to the rhetoric, the theater and the longer term impact of this set piece in American politics.</em></p>
<hr>
<h2>SOTU has few traditions to break: it’s the content that counts</h2>
<p>*<em>J Michael Hogan, Pennsylvania State University
*</em></p>
<p>Even before he spoke, the pundits accused Barack Obama of “killing” the State of the Union (SOTU) address by previewing its content in speeches, videos and social media. The SOTU is no longer the “big reveal,” they complained, which presumably diminished both its audience and the tradition itself. </p>
<p>Hogwash! Although rooted in the Constitution, the SOTU has never been that tradition-bound. </p>
<p>Delivered as a written report for much of our history, Wilson changed it into a major speech to Congress; Coolidge made it a radio address; Truman delivered it on TV; and LBJ moved it to prime time. And George W. Bush gets the credit (or blame) for first streaming it over the Internet. </p>
<p>Whatever the medium, the message is what matters. Scholars still point to Ronald Reagan’s 1982 SOTU as one that transformed the genre by invoking the personal stories of invited guests to illustrate his themes. They also still talk about SOTU addresses with big ideas, like the <a href="http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/monroe.asp">Monroe Doctrine</a> in 1823, Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s <a href="http://www.fdrlibrary.marist.edu/fourfreedoms">Four Freedoms</a> or Lyndon Johnson’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/search?q=lbj%27s+great+society&sort=relevancy&date=all&date_from=&date_to=&type=all">Great Society</a>. </p>
<p>Let’s hope that the pundits will now provide at least some analysis of Obama’s ideas instead of obsessing over how the speech was delivered and its implications for the next presidential election. </p>
<hr>
<h2>Rallying the party with ‘middle class economics’</h2>
<p><strong>Tom Cronin, Colorado College</strong></p>
<p>President Obama gave an optimistic talk about how America has recovered from the major recession and proposed a populist “Middle Class Economics” policy agenda that might help working and middle class America enjoy more of the fruits of this recovery. </p>
<p>Most Americans probably either didn’t listen to his talk or turned it off mid-way through. And research shows that few of these types of talks have more than a minor impact on public opinion or what Congress is inclined to do.</p>
<p>Still, it is an opportunity for any president to help shape the agenda. Americans expect presidents to celebrate the nation and talk proudly about recent accomplishments and possible future achievements. Obama,like most recent presidents, did this. </p>
<p>The president is a polished speaker and has a splendid ability to portray shared aspirations. What he was especially able to do in the talk, even if momentarily, was to make people forget that Democrats just suffered one of their worst elections defeats in generations. </p>
<p>Obama’s strongest sections were talking about the economy and what might be done to help community college students, low wage earners and helping on issues such as child care and paid sick leave. He cleverly, or perhaps deceptively, avoided talking about hiking capital gains taxes and similar revenue-generating policies needed to pay for these programs.</p>
<p>The President seemed to be claiming too much credit for the recovery and similarly conveyed more progress in Afghanistan and Iraq and in the war against terrorism than is justified.</p>
<p>Overall, however, he rallied his party, set out some worthy aspirations and established some progressive markers that will require members of Congress to at least consider and debate them. </p>
<p>He was using the bully pulpit as best he could, but no one expects major breakthroughs on most of his agenda, save perhaps on trade and cybersecurity issues.</p>
<hr>
<h2>Muted trumpet, quiet hands: a visual and aural analysis</h2>
<p><strong>Michael Cornfield, George Washington University</strong></p>
<p>Television and video focus our attention on facial expressions. Since the contents and contexts of the SOTU have been heavily discussed (both before and after its delivery) by partisans, journalists and academics, I decided to write about what the faces said to us viewers during the speech and to listen carefully to the president’s tone of voice.</p>
<p>Obama began in a key of confidence and concluded in a pleading higher register that reminded me of James Stewart as Jefferson Smith in the early, relatively composed stage of his fictional filibuster in the movie Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. He did not soar, as he is famous for, but the uplift echoed those orations past. </p>
<p>Obama struck me as a valedictorian: proud of his GPA (two wins, no losses, as he reminded the Republicans), non-strategic in his agenda and outreach and wishful for the same “higher politics” he advocated eleven years ago in his “One America” speech at the Democratic National Convention in Boston, which he referenced.</p>
<p>The reactions of the assembled were in large part impassive and subdued. There were very few standing ovations and they were very brief in duration. </p>
<p>Speaker Boehner, visible throughout, mostly pursed his lips; oddly, I did not see Senate Majority Leader McConnell. The greatest show of emotion came from Alan Gross, the freed Cuban prisoner, who flashed his broken smile and mouthed thanks. House Ways and Means Chairman Paul Ryan was glimpsed three times, wearing a grudging half-smile. Democratic stalwart Maxine Waters relished a swipe at the GOP’s focus on the Keystone pipeline.</p>
<p>The Republican majority, while stony, did not turn its back on the president in the manner of New York City police, not even when Obama defended the object of the officers’ scorn, Mayor de Blasio. The Democrats cheered, especially Elizabeth Warren, but not overly so.</p>
<p>Emotions, especially anger, can energize political participation. At the set piece theater that is the SOTU, we saw and heard very little emotion. Perhaps in the context of recent terrorism and the ultimatums that dominated the last Congress, that is a good thing. </p>
<hr>
<h2>Four reasons why this is Obama’s best SOTU ever</h2>
<p><strong>Matthew Hale, Seton Hall University</strong> </p>
<p>President Obama sounded, acted and seemed to really enjoy being a Democrat in his State of the Union Speech, no small feat for a president facing a hostile congress filled with Republican faces. This was, I think, his best State of the Union speech ever for four reasons. </p>
<ul>
<li><p>First, the President took credit for his successes in the economy. He hasn’t had as much good economic news in past years but this year he did and he wasn’t afraid to talk about it. </p></li>
<li><p>Second, he wasn’t afraid to throw a punch. He took long overdue smacks at Vladimir Putin and one at snarky republicans laughing at the fact he has no more elections. </p></li>
<li><p>Third, he made promoting the middle class a cohesive theme and not just a checklist of programs. </p></li>
<li><p>Fourth and finally, the President didn’t forget that he has some serious rhetorical gifts. He referenced his 2004 Democratic convention speech and used its soaring optimism as a concluding theme to this one. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>The President needed to show he was still important and still in the game. He more than accomplished those goals. </p>
<hr>
<h2>It’s all about 2016</h2>
<p><strong>John Geer, Vanderbilt University</strong></p>
<p>The discussion about the 2016 presidential election is in full swing. </p>
<p>There are a lot of unknowns as we approach this contest. One thing we do know is that Barack Obama will not be on the ballot. He reminded us of that fact in his State of the Union speech. </p>
<p>Even so, he will play a critical role in the upcoming battle for the White House. The SOTU highlights the role he can and will play. </p>
<p>By touting the recent gains in the economy, he provides the Democrats the argument for retaining the White House: unemployment is falling, the deficit is shrinking and economic growth is robust. </p>
<p>At the same time, he is forcing the Republicans into an unappealing box. </p>
<p>They can no longer claim the economy is stagnant, as Mitt Romney did in 2012. Instead, Republicans must shift focus to income disparities; namely that the middle class has not been part of the economic recovery. </p>
<p>This is not an easy argument for the Republicans to make given their own history of tax policies that have favored the wealthiest Americans. Obama knows that and surely relished that aspect of the speech as he pushed the GOP into unfriendly territory. </p>
<p>If the economy continues to do well for the next 22 months, the Republican nominee will likely find the 2016 presidential election an uphill climb: Barack Obama will be a key reason for it. </p>
<hr>
<h2>A theater of whimsy</h2>
<p><strong>Daniel Franklin, Georgia State University</strong></p>
<p>The State of the Union address has become part of the theater of American politics but does anyone watch? </p>
<p>Democrats pushed hard to increase their viewership in 2015 by urging supporters to watch the speech on their smart phones and tablets. Maybe the strategy worked. According to the latest count there were over <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/01/21/obama-sotu-twitter-facebook/22100811/">two and a half million tweets </a>related to the speech. Although, it should also be said that, according to<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/tv-column/post/about-38-million-people-watch-obamas-state-of-the-union/2012/01/25/gIQAYN3ORQ_blog.html"> Nielsen</a>, television viewing of the SOTU was at an all time low of 38 million. </p>
<p>As to the speech itself, President Obama engaged in what best can be described as political whimsy as raising taxes on the rich and much of the rest of his program has as much chance of passing in the next Congress as a snowball’s chance in … oh well, you know. I presume that fans of term limits will be ecstatic about watching a lame duck president adopt a strategy of make a wish policy list.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/36353/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matthew Hale is a registered Democrat. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daniel P. Franklin, J Michael Hogan, John G Geer, Michael Cornfield, and Tom Cronin do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Editor’s note: “The state of the union is good,” and the attitude of President Barack Obama in his annual speech to Congress was upbeat. Good economic news and no more election campaigns were the backdrop…Matthew Hale, Associate Professor and MPA Program Chair, Department of Political Science and Public Affairs , Seton Hall UniversityDaniel P. Franklin, Associate Professor, Political Science and Author of Pitiful Giants: Presidents in their Final Terms, Georgia State UniversityJ Michael Hogan, Liberal Arts Research Professor Director, Center for Democratic Deliberation Dept. of Communication Arts and Sciences, Penn StateJohn G Geer, Gertrude Conaway Vanderbilt Professor of Political Science, Professor of Public Policy and Education Co-Director, Vanderbilt Poll, Vanderbilt UniversityMichael Cornfield, Associate Professor of Political Management; Research Director, Global Center for Political Engagement , George Washington UniversityTom Cronin, McHugh Professor of American Institutions and Leadership, Colorado CollegeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/364652015-01-21T17:19:18Z2015-01-21T17:19:18ZThe State of the Union 2015 – a closer look at the president’s ‘ambitious agenda’<p><em>Editor’s note: “The state of the union is good,” and the attitude of President Barack Obama in his annual speech to Congress was upbeat. Good economic news and no more election campaigns were the backdrop to the president’s “<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/21/us/state-of-the-union-obama-ambitious-agenda-to-help-middle-class.html?ribbon-ad-idx=3&rref=homepage">ambitious agenda</a>” and “<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/?reload=true">assertive</a>” call to action. Here scholars from around the US give their reactions to particular items that the president has put on that agenda.</em></p>
<hr>
<h2>Tax proposals progressive but not populist</h2>
<p><strong>Elizabeth Pearson, University of California Berkeley</strong></p>
<p>President Obama’s State of the Union tax proposals formed the building blocks of the commitment to “middle class economics” he outlined in his speech. </p>
<p>These proposed tax changes are more progressive than populist: the plan would increase taxes for the very richest Americans and use new revenues to fund proposals aimed at middle- and working-class families, but the speech did not emphasize the tax system’s role in addressing income equality or poverty. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/01/17/fact-sheet-simpler-fairer-tax-code-responsibly-invests-middle-class-fami">According to specifics from the White House</a>, the tax increases have three main components: raising the top rate for capital gains taxes, imposing a fee on large financial institutions, and removing a tax break for wealthy estates. </p>
<p>Higher revenues would fund expanded child-care tax credits, a new tax credit for two-earner households and additional tax credits for higher education. </p>
<p>Although Republicans in Congress are open to the idea of using tax credits to deliver benefits to working families, using higher taxes on wealthy Americans and firms to pay for these credits is sure to be a non-starter. Obama’s State of the Union tax proposals are best viewed as an effort to set the agenda for a 2016 Democratic party platform focused squarely on middle-class households. </p>
<hr>
<h2>President Obama and the budget: expect more gridlock, no solutions to long-term problems</h2>
<p><strong>Philip Joyce, University of Maryland, School of Public Policy</strong> </p>
<p>State of the Union speeches are opportunities for Presidents to tell us what they stand for and President Obama’s speech was no exception. </p>
<p>The policies that he outlined -— free community college, improvements in infrastructure, tax credits for child care — are consistent with his past agenda. He would apparently pay for those policies by raising taxes on the top one percent -— a recurring idea from this administration.</p>
<p>Regardless of what one thinks about the substance of these ideas, there are two things that we can say with reasonable certainty. </p>
<ul>
<li><p>The tax proposals aren’t going anywhere. With both parties of the Congress in Republican hands, we are more likely to see tax cuts for the top one percent pass than tax increases for any Americans. </p></li>
<li><p>While the President is correct that budget deficits have come down by two thirds between fiscal years 2009 and 2014, the federal debt has risen from 50 percent of GDP to more than 70 percent of GDP over this same period; it is projected to remain there over the next ten years. We heard nothing in the speech about policy proposals -— tax increases for deficit reduction, or entitlement reform – that would put the budget on a sustainable path for the future. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>There seems to be little question that the President’s proposals represent his policy preferences; there is also little doubt that they remind us that we should expect two more years of partisan gridlock. </p>
<hr>
<h2>How education is the key to a model nation</h2>
<p><strong>Stella M. Flores, Vanderbilt University</strong></p>
<p>President Obama issued a State of the Union address that emphasized global leadership on economy and education. </p>
<p>What was not explicitly stated is what <a href="https://jhupbooks.press.jhu.edu/content/attainment-agenda">scholars</a> Laura Perna and Joni Finney, among others, document: that a key factor distinguishing economically prosperous nations from their poorer counterpart nations is the extent to which the poorest of citizens are provided the opportunity for increased education, which can can be translated into skills that enhance national economic growth. </p>
<p>Although the president’s proposals were short on detail, their substance indicates that small steps are indeed being taken toward regaining global leadership on educational attainment. </p>
<p>Obama highlighted notable successes in math scores, high school graduation rates, and college enrollment. But these rates for the <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/high-school-graduation-rates-at-historic-high/2014/04/28/84eb0122-cee0-11e3-937f-d3026234b51c_story.html">poorest Americans</a> remain unacceptable. A proposal for free community college – the new standard for the 21st century American Dream – could be a remedy and here is why. </p>
<p>Free college may provide the greatest opportunity for middle-class entry into the 21st century economy not previously imagined for many. The proposal is not without challenges but it could provide a clear and strong signal to those who otherwise are receiving little or confusing information about their ability to access higher education. </p>
<p>President Obama did not venture into discussing his administration’s <a href="http://www2.ed.gov/documents/college-affordability/framework-invitation-comment.pdf">controversial proposals</a> to put together a new college rating system. Instead he focused on providing the bricks and mortar to build the new educational standard for Americans and to reduce student debt. </p>
<p>This strategy addresses opportunity gaps for the poor who still believe in mobility as well as how to sustain any hard-won mobility. The next generation will be stronger because of such efforts.</p>
<hr>
<h2>A lost opportunity to chart education</h2>
<p><strong>Arnold F. Shober, Lawrence University</strong></p>
<p>President Obama’s sixth State of the Union was a missed opportunity for American education. </p>
<p>Yes, he used significant real estate on community college, but what was unmentioned in the speech was that two major federal laws supporting K-12 and higher education need re-authorization by this Congress. </p>
<p>Both the <a href="http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2014/12/what_might_a_republican_no_chi.html">No Child Left Behind Act</a> and the <a href="http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2014/11/05/11hea.h34.html">Higher Education Act</a> were last reauthorized with bipartisan support (in 2001 and 2008, respectively). </p>
<p>Significantly, President Obama has shared ground with several key Republicans on both bills. For K-12 education, the president supports some school choice and public accountability for results. On higher education, some Republicans agree with his views about streamlining student-aid financing and requiring a form of college accountability. He could have used the State of the Union to offer an olive branch on these upcoming bills. </p>
<p>Unfortunately for the president, his community college plan is not likely to win many plaudits from the majority party. </p>
<p>The president called for “zero” cost community college if students kept high grades and graduated “on time.” Republicans are likely to hear a proposal to increase federal spending and expand federal mandates regarding grades and graduation. Neither is likely to sit well with Representative John Kline (R-MN) or Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), the chairmen of Congress’ education committees. Alexander has been an especially strenuous opponent of federal regulation of higher education.</p>
<p>Obama seemed at pains to tweak Republicans and propose policies a bit further left of previous addresses. </p>
<p>This, to my mind, is a lost opportunity. To date, the president has enacted his education agenda through temporary waivers and regulations that a future administration can easily revoke. This was his last chance to cement his vision for American education. </p>
<hr>
<h2>Chance for a new approach in energy and climate</h2>
<p>*<em>Michael Greenstone, The University of Chicago’s Energy Policy Institute at Chicago (EPIC)
*</em></p>
<p>President Obama’s former chief of staff and Chicago’s current Mayor Rahm Emanuel once said, “You never let a serious crisis go to waste…it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.” The same is true of good luck. The recent remarkable reductions in natural gas and oil prices are good luck that we should not waste.</p>
<p>In his State of the Union, president Obama issued another strong call to confront climate change and emphasized the efforts his administration has taken to act on this front. While his efforts have transformed US climate policy, there is a golden opportunity staring us in the face. </p>
<p>Energy price declines present a rare chance to move away from regulatory approaches and set a price on carbon. This move would not only combat climate change and very likely spur further action to reduce greenhouse gases by other countries, but it would also provide the revenues necessary to address several other national priorities, including increasing access to education, infrastructure improvements, shoring up our entitlement programs, and reducing taxes – all of which the president mentioned in his address.</p>
<hr>
<h2>Past time for regulation to deal with cybercrime</h2>
<p><strong>Daniel Lopresti, Lehigh University</strong> </p>
<p>Drawing an analogy to the war on terrorism, President Obama noted – about 41 minutes into his State of the Union address – that he is proposing legislation to protect companies and consumers against cybercriminals. </p>
<p>As we have just witnessed in the attack on Sony Pictures which has been connected to North Korea, such threats are very real, potentially devastating and guaranteed to escalate over time. </p>
<p>In an increasingly interconnected world – an era now becoming known as the “internet of Things” – anything and everything connected to a network becomes vulnerable, including not only computers, but smartphones, TVs, portions of the transportation infrastructure, public utilities, medical devices, appliances, etc.</p>
<p>Beyond the steps government can take to provide law-enforcement agencies with the tools needed to combat high-tech crime, we need a public educated to the nature of these threats so that they are less likely to fall victim, as well as basic research on cybersecurity and cyberdefense. </p>
<p>It is also important to recognize that cybercrime is fundamentally different from traditional crime in that it leverages the interconnectedness of people and systems. Hackers look for the weakest link in a chain which they then use as an entry point to escalate their attack. </p>
<p>That companies should be required to report when their systems have been compromised seems straightforward enough – this is one of the thrusts in the president’s message – but surprisingly regulations like this have generated<a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/02/us-hacking-disclosures-idUSTRE8110YW20120202"> pushback</a> in part because they appear to expose one’s weaknesses to the outside world. This old-fashioned view is dangerous and we need to get over it.</p>
<p>Consider the case of a free, entertainment website that requires no payment and stores nothing more than a user’s login ID and password. Data harvested by attacking a weak system can be turned around and applied in attempts to gain access to more vital systems (e.g., online banking, medical records or email accounts). The weak links in your chain are the systems you use that are not carefully maintained and protected. </p>
<hr>
<h2>The need for cyberhygiene</h2>
<p><strong>Anupam Joshi, University of Maryland Baltimore County</strong></p>
<p>The fact that cybersecurity found mention in the president’s SOTU address, among weighty issues like fundamental new approaches to taxation and foreign policy, is a testament to how important this issue is today. From (corporate) espionage and identity theft to financial crimes and ransomware, cyberspace is where sophisticated state, non-state and criminal enterprise actors are now most active. </p>
<p>The president correctly identified that we need to protect cyberspace to reap the benefits of the digital revolution, focusing on greater information sharing to improve security. </p>
<p>Presumably, this refers to passage of proposed legislation to provide targeted liability protection that would enable more information about private sector attacks to reach the Department of Homeland Security’s National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center. Such legislation will enable researchers to have the data to better understand, detect, and deter attacks, but there are also significant issues around privacy and data security that need to be carefully addressed. </p>
<p>Earlier this month, the White House suggested that better tools for law enforcement, newer requirements on reporting data breaches, and support for cybersecurity education are needed.</p>
<p>These are all important, but I would urge a particular focus on significantly expanding cybersecurity education far beyond the typical college-level courses to train cyber defenders. </p>
<p>What we need is a greater awareness of “cyberhygiene” for the average internet user – simple “preventative medicine” tactics to minimize risk for individuals and for us all. Just as kids are taught to wash hands for 20 seconds or be careful around strangers for example, they should be taught to be careful when clicking on links embedded in emails.</p>
<hr>
<h2>It’s in foreign policy that the president will make a difference</h2>
<p>*<em>I M Mac Destler, University of Maryland
*</em></p>
<p>Obama’s economic proposals have won the headlines, but the international measures he highlighted in his State of the Union will likely be what matter most in his last two years. </p>
<p>Unlike his domestic tax initiatives, which cannot be realized in his presidency, serious, durable change is within reach across a range of foreign issues: Pacific and Atlantic trade, nuclear talks with Iran, relations with Cuba, global agreement on climate change. Congressional action will be needed on some of these, and on the struggle against radical Islam. </p>
<p>Obama is leading on key international matters, and can make a difference.</p>
<hr>
<h2>Health care: still in play</h2>
<p><strong>George A. Nation III, Lehigh University</strong></p>
<p>The State of the Union speech made it clear that the 2016 election season has begun. The speech was about staking out political turf – not about laying out a plan to govern. </p>
<p>With regard to health care, the President proudly stated that today more Americans have health insurance than ever before, and that healthcare inflation is the lowest in 50 years. The President also stated forcefully that he would veto any attempt by Republicans to roll back the progress of the Affordable Care Act (ACA.) Republicans advocate repeal and replace, although they did not discuss the replacement.</p>
<p>The ACA is far from an unmitigated success. The Congressional Budget Office estimates <a href="http://www.cbo.gov/publication/44176">31 million Americans</a> will still be without health insurance in 2023. The reduction in <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/11/06/obamas-claim-that-obamacare-has-reduced-health-care-inflation-every-single-year-since-it-was-passed/">healthcare inflation</a> is likely attributable at least as much to the recession as to the ACA and the process of acquiring insurance is still confusing to many and expensive. </p>
<p>Moreover, President Obama’s signature legislative achievement, according to the <a href="http://kff.org/interactive/health-tracking-poll-exploring-the-publics-views-on-the-affordable-care-act-aca/">polls</a>, is not popular and will likely remain so, as health insurance gets significantly more expensive when <a href="http://kff.org/interactive/health-tracking-poll-exploring-the-publics-views-on-the-affordable-care-act-aca/">two important provisions</a> – risk corridors and <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/10/15/delaying-obamacares-reinsurance-fee-would-be-a-win-for-insurers/">reinsurance</a> (both of which help protect insurers) – expire in 2017.</p>
<p>Moreover, the survival of the ACA is in jeopardy and not just from Republicans. This spring the <a href="http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/227891-obamacare-case-scheduled-for-supreme-court">Supreme Court </a>may decide that subsidies are unavailable on federal exchanges, and this would effectively kill the ACA. </p>
<p>While the President can veto any attempt by Congress to repeal and replace the ACA, even his pen cannot veto a Supreme Court decision.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/36465/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stella M Flores received funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anupam Joshi has received funding from both government (eg NSF, DoD and NASA) and industry (including IBM, Microsoft and Lockheed Martin) </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Prof. Shober has previously received funding from the Institute for Education Sciences.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daniel P Lopresti previously received funding from the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).
</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>From 2010-2014, Elizabeth Pearson received support for her graduate research on taxation in the United States from the U.S. Department of Education through the Jacob K. Javits Fellowship Program.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>George A Nation III is affiliated with the Philadelphia Bar Association.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>IM 'Mac' Destler is a registered Democrat. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michael Greenstone receives funding from the National Science Foundation, EPA and the Sloan Foundation. He is a fellow with the Brookings Institute.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Phillip G Joyce does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Editor’s note: “The state of the union is good,” and the attitude of President Barack Obama in his annual speech to Congress was upbeat. Good economic news and no more election campaigns were the backdrop…Stella M Flores, Associate Professor of Public Policy and Higher Education, Dept. of Leadership, Policy & Organizations, Peabody College, Vanderbilt UniversityAnupam Joshi, Professor, Department of Computer Science & Electrical Engineering , University of Maryland, Baltimore CountyArnold F. Shober, Associate Professor of Government, Lawrence UniversityDaniel P Lopresti, Interim Dean, P.C. Rossin College of Engineering and Applied Science; Professor, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Lehigh University Elizabeth Pearson, PhD Student in Sociology, University of California, BerkeleyGeorge A Nation III, Professor, Perella Department of Finance and Law , Lehigh University IM 'Mac' Destler, Saul Stern Professor of Civic Engagement, University of MarylandMichael Greenstone, Professor in Economics; Director, Energy Policy Institute, University of ChicagoPhillip G Joyce, Professor of Public Policy, School of Public Policy , University of MarylandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/364322015-01-21T03:55:19Z2015-01-21T03:55:19ZWith a liberal State of the Union agenda, Obama revives theme of hope<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/69597/original/image-20150121-29731-f5lbf5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Barack Obama outlined a vision of post-recession liberalism that was at once hopeful and limited in his State of the Union address.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Astrid Riecken</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>On Tuesday night (US time), President Barack Obama gave his second-last State of the Union <a href="https://medium.com/@WhiteHouse/president-obamas-state-of-the-union-address-remarks-as-prepared-for-delivery-55f9825449b2">address</a> – and the last one that has the potential to shape his legacy. Next year the country will be caught up in the primaries for the 2016 election. The president’s agenda will play second fiddle to the proposals of a bevy of aspiring presidential candidates. </p>
<p>But with two years left in his presidency, Obama had the nation’s attention on Tuesday. He used it to outline a vision of post-recession liberalism that was at once hopeful and limited.</p>
<p>Though upbeat and spirited, Obama’s speech served as a studied contrast to the boldness of his recent executive actions. Hemmed in by obstruction in Congress, Obama has, in the last several months, used his authority as president to enact his agenda. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/19/us/politics/obama-intends-to-lift-several-restrictions-against-cuba-on-his-own.html">Opening relations</a> with Cuba, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/11/19/your-complete-guide-to-obamas-immigration-order/">easing</a> immigration restrictions, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/02/us/politics/epa-to-seek-30-percent-cut-in-carbon-emissions.html">ratcheting up</a> carbon regulations – with the clock ticking down on his presidency, Obama has seemed energised and emboldened.</p>
<p>Obama had fun delivering tonight’s speech. He was loose, confident and playful – a welcome change from his previous State of the Union addresses. But his proposals seemed tame in comparison to recent executive actions: lowering mortgage premiums, expanding childcare tax credits, a few years’ of free community college. </p>
<p>These are important policies, to be sure, but nothing particularly daring or innovative.</p>
<p>Obama also outlined a vision he has no chance of delivering. He laid out legislative proposals, but with Republicans controlling both houses of Congress, his odds of getting liberal legislation passed are vanishingly small. In the last two years when Republicans controlled only the House, Obama saw only 5% (2013) and 14% (2014) of his State of the Union proposals <a href="http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/the-share-of-state-of-the-union-proposals-that-become-law/">enacted into law</a>. </p>
<p>All that Obama might get through Congress – <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jan/20/barack-obama-trans-pacific-partnership-republicans">trade agreements</a> and <a href="http://thehill.com/policy/finance/227718-obama-specific-tax-reform-proposals-coming">corporate tax reform</a> – are fairly conservative proposals, which will draw more opposition from Democrats than Republicans.</p>
<p>This is why it was so important for Obama to outline a broader, more genuinely liberal plan in this State of the Union. Judged only on what he signs into law in the next few years, Obama will likely appear far more conservative than he would prefer. This speech offered a roadmap for incremental legislative liberalism in the years that follow his presidency, which, if enacted, can be considered part of Obama’s legacy. </p>
<p>From the very start of the speech Obama embraced this long view, saying:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It’s now up to us to choose who we want to be over the next 15 years, and for decades to come.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But more importantly, Obama’s speech was a necessary counterpart to his executive action. His executive actions have been clear and immediate – a welcome relief from an intractable, immobilised Congress. </p>
<p>But the very ease with which executive actions are put in place makes them simple to undo when the next administration comes in. A Republican presidential victory in 2016 could mean all Obama’s executive audacity was for nought. Though it would be difficult to undo the Cuba thaw, carbon caps and deferred deportations would disappear overnight, and with them an important chunk of Obama’s legacy.</p>
<p>Lasting change comes, as it should, through legislation. While Obama knows few of his proposals will become law in the next two years, he has presented a blueprint that can guide Democratic legislators even after he leaves office.</p>
<p>Though not sweeping in scope – Obama did not propose major programs like universal health care or student loan forgiveness or an expansion of programs for the poor – the speech offered instead a liberalism grounded in opportunity and security, an incremental way to reshape the recovery, thus far limited to the wealthiest Americans, along the lines of what Obama called “middle-class economics”.</p>
<p>The 2015 State of the Union, then, was not only about the future but about the past. It showed that the past six years have tempered Obama. He talked about vetoing bills as much as he urged Congress to pass them.</p>
<p>In the best passage of his address, Obama recalled his famous <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A19751-2004Jul27.html">2004 speech</a> to the Democratic National Convention in which he asserted that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>… there’s not a liberal America and a conservative America; there’s the United States of America.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Obama then noted that, given the polarisation of the past six years, many people had questioned that vision of the United States. “I know how tempting such cynicism may be,” he said. “But I still think the cynics are wrong.” </p>
<p>And they are, in the long view. Hope and change still exist for Obama, but the hopes are more distant, and the changes will have to be made permanent on someone else’s watch.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/36432/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nicole Hemmer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>On Tuesday night (US time), President Barack Obama gave his second-last State of the Union address – and the last one that has the potential to shape his legacy. Next year the country will be caught up…Nicole Hemmer, Visiting Assistant Professor at University of Miami; Research Associate, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/364452015-01-21T03:14:09Z2015-01-21T03:14:09ZObama defies lame duck fears with State of the Union address<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/69594/original/image-20150121-29736-ybpkte.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Time to build a legacy.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Mandel Ngan</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>President Barack Obama has <a href="https://medium.com/@WhiteHouse/president-obamas-state-of-the-union-address-remarks-as-prepared-for-delivery-55f9825449b2">pointed to</a> an improving economy and the need for a taxation system that shares the benefits in an agenda-setting State of the Union challenge to the Republican congressional majority. </p>
<p>The State of the Union speech serves as a rhetorical tool. It is when the US president acknowledges the start of the new legislative session in high pageantry, elaborate ceremony, staunch tradition and endless pomp.</p>
<p>Historically, the address contains three elements, including a public meditation on values, an assessment of current affairs and a series of policy recommendations. Invariably, there are references to partisanship and the past, along with optimism about the future. This address was no different.</p>
<p>Ideally, the State of the Union provides a platform for the president to provide an upbeat rendition of the nation’s well-being, uninterrupted by partisan naysaying. Obama’s approval ratings ahead of the address were a <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/116479/barack-obama-presidential-job-approval.aspx">respectable 46%</a> – higher than any time in the past 18 months.</p>
<p>This boost is particularly linked to perceived economic improvement. Obama noted that the US economy is creating jobs <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3cc791bc-9802-11e4-84d4-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3PQBGzGdr">at its fastest pace since 1999</a>, and that the unemployment rate has recovered to better than pre-global financial crisis levels. This could result in a further rise in the polls.</p>
<h2>Last hurrah</h2>
<p>The last quarter of any two-term presidency is referred to as the lame duck session. However, this period does not necessarily equate to presidential weakness, as Obama appears determined to demonstrate. </p>
<p>There is a certain liberation in no longer having to concern oneself with re-election, and the self-styled herald of “hope and change” has come a long way from his naive presidential debut in 2008. Over the past six years, Obama has slowly built up his bullish resistance to the granite wall of Republican opposition.</p>
<p>There is no doubt that GOP lawmakers will go to great lengths to avoid advancing the presidential agenda. Their anger was especially piqued by Obama’s recent <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-21/obama-delivers-new-immigration-plan/5908162">executive action</a> protecting five million illegal workers from deportation. </p>
<p>Obama is demonstrating a determination to push his agenda as far and as fast as he can in the time he has left, by any means necessary. His address therefore included talk of Cuba, and a promise to veto any legislation that would “put the security of families at risk”, on health care and immigration.</p>
<p>The re-establishment of <a href="https://theconversation.com/after-a-tense-50-years-obama-and-castro-announce-us-cuba-thaw-35635">relations with Cuba</a> has been a major talking point, and not everyone is pleased. Clearly, Obama will be mindful of what now looks like an inevitable Hillary Clinton <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/01/20/pelosi-2016-is-hillary-clintons-for-the-taking/">candidacy for 2016</a>, and will assist in paving the way for her ascent. The Cuba initiative is a political gift to his Democrat successor, as the crucial Latino vote, which makes up approximately 12% of the electorate, will no doubt respond positively.</p>
<p>Other agenda items include tax reform, promoting paid leave for working parents and making community college free. These may not be the most headline-grabbing topics, but developments on these fronts would go some way to shoring up Obama’s liberal credentials. </p>
<p>Obama is now entering the period when the notion of legacy becomes increasingly pertinent. It won’t be practical to play out his final two years on the back of executive actions alone, but Obama has made it clear that hostile congressional opposition to his plans won’t ruin his parting plans. And with congressional approval ratings at a <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx">dismal 16%</a>, the legislative branch is not due to outshine the president any time soon.</p>
<p>Unlike so many of his predecessors, Obama has had the luxury, and the credit, of not being mired in scandal during his second term in office. Sage counsel was recently offered from a man who knows something about making it through those final two years facing a hostile congressional majority. Former president Bill Clinton <a href="http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/bill-clinton-advice-obama-have-fun">advised Obama</a> to “have fun” and “cut deals”. </p>
<p>Obama has everything to gain by sailing through this final stretch buoyed by his enhanced political skill and with the wind of public opinion at his back.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/36445/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Clodagh Harrington does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>President Barack Obama has pointed to an improving economy and the need for a taxation system that shares the benefits in an agenda-setting State of the Union challenge to the Republican congressional…Clodagh Harrington, Senior Lecturer in Politics, De Montfort UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/364642015-01-20T11:04:17Z2015-01-20T11:04:17ZState of the Union 2015: telegraphing the punches with purpose<p>There are many ways to look at the Obama approach to the 2015 State of the Union – the idea that the President’s strategy is ruining the culture and tradition of the State of the Union address is just one view and has been prevalent among his critics and some <a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/barack-obama-state-of-the-union-2015-114270.html">observers.</a> </p>
<p>The value of this speech and its importance to American politics has risen and fallen with the context and the times; most recently it has become a combination “wish list” and “pageant.” The Obama administration is taking a different approach in 2015. </p>
<p>Normally, when a boxer “telegraphs his punches” it’s considered a serious mistake, a strategic error. In 2015, Obama is telegraphing his punches with a purpose. He no longer has future elections to worry about – no “piper” to pay. In 2015 the only piper the President intends to pay is Obama himself. </p>
<p>The State of the Union will not be the speech where the President unveils a litany of new initiatives; he has already unveiled a host of initiatives clearly intended to push forward a vigorous agenda and set the Republican opposition on its heels. </p>
<h2>Obama’s recent initiatives</h2>
<p>Consider the following moves the President has already made in public: the opening to Cuba; executive action on immigration; new police initiatives through the Department of Justice; the initiative requiring companies to offer paid sick leave to workers; the BuySecure Initiative safeguarding consumers from Internet cyber threats; high speed broadband expansion across the states; the Build America initiative to make infrastructure investment in roads, ports and drinking water systems; veto warnings on Republican plans to undo Obama Care and pass through the Keystone Pipeline; mortgage relief, tax reform and more. </p>
<p>The President will offer to work with the congress now fully controlled by the Republican opposition, but he has already given notice – he is on the move. President Obama is challenging the opposition to say no. Despite opposition from his critics, Obama will require and receive the funding he needs for national security and the war on terror, most especially in Iraq and the Islamic State.</p>
<h2>Up to Congress</h2>
<p>What can the Republican opposition do in response? </p>
<p>The President will be using the 2015 State of the Union Address to popularize initiatives already in motion. The challenge by Obama is intended to put the Republican majority on the defensive. Without future elections to worry about, President Obama seems to have gained energy – a spring in his step. Meanwhile, the Republicans are still mired in their ongoing internal debate about “the brand.” </p>
<p>The majority party is <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-live/2014/02/jindal-gop-cant-be-party-of-no-183811.html">struggling</a> to somehow escape being defined as the “<a href="http://swampland.time.com/2012/08/23/the-party-of-no-new-details-on-the-gop-plot-to-obstruct-obama/">Party of No,</a>” and the “angry, pro-white, anti-woman, defender of the <a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-the-gop-became-the-party-of-the-rich-20111109?page=2">super-rich.”</a> This is certainly an odd and ironic moment in history when the victorious majority party seems to have a problem with identity and struggles to define a real vision. </p>
<p>All of this will be even more interesting to watch as the Republicans gear up for the 2016 elections in search of a standard bearer who they hope will take them to the White House again. As the Republicans begin a final push to make Obama completely irrelevant, they might be surprised to see a President who is gaining new life and purpose on the wings of a major electoral defeat. The Republicans will be forced to make a choice: to work with or against the President, and either choice will complicate their efforts to re-make their brand. </p>
<p>Obama is telegraphing his punches, but he is clearly going down swinging.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/36464/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anthony Brunello does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There are many ways to look at the Obama approach to the 2015 State of the Union – the idea that the President’s strategy is ruining the culture and tradition of the State of the Union address is just…Anthony Brunello, Professor of Political Science , Eckerd CollegeLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.