Obama's First Year: Trying to Do Too Much?

Trying to Do Too Much Sure Beats Trying to Do Too Little

Michael Thompson
President Obama's first year in office concludes with criticism that he "is trying to do too much." This seems odd. Should he try to do less?

With conclusion of President Obama's first year, it indeed seems like a long time since he walked with the canary-yellow clad First Lady in the January 2009 inaugural parade. The first year for President Obama seems like a long one for two reasons: (1) He has tried to accomplish a great deal, and (2) He has faced a great deal of resistance.

Was President Obama "trying to do too much" in his first year, in his first month, when he marshaled the $787 billion economic stimulus package? The economy was totally in the tank. Republicans called for more economic stimulus tax cuts, seemingly oblivious that they were repeating the failed mantra of the past eight years. Obama tried to demonstrate his "team player" promise when he agreed that $252 billion of the stimulus plan would go for tax cuts, although rachetted lower on the income scale than the prior Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. Obama still was accused of being one-sided, which would portend future friction with entrenched Republicans.

Was President Obama "trying to do too much" in his first year when he tackled health care insurance reform? The U.S. system now absorbs 17 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), compared to an average of about 10 percent in other modern-day democracies in Europe, Japan and South Korea. Still, Obama encountered massive status quo resistance. The legislation he will win is watered down, but he has accomplished more on health care than any president since Lyndon Johnson, who achieved Medicare and Medicaid in 1965.

Was President Obama "trying to do too much" in his first year with his Cairo speech to the Arab world, or with his recent jobs summit, or with his pursuit of alternative energy sources, or with his various other initiatives?

President Obama famously has said, more than once, that a president must be smart enough (and dedicated enough) to do more than one thing at a time. It's interesting that state lottery players can figure out the multitude of available choices, and football fans can keep track of intricate systems for the college BCS and pro NFL playoffs, to provide just two examples. But nobody says the lottery or football execs are "trying to do too much."

My skeptical side says that some of our problems may have grown to the point of becoming intractable, and that too many Americans have become so cynical and selfish that they won't give President Obama a chance. When the same people who receive Medicare also blast health care reform as "socialized medicine," and when the same people who rip Obama for "trying to do too much" also criticize him for taking a family vacation, those are just two examples of prevailing ignorance.

Still, if President Obama wants to continue "trying to do too much" in 2010, more power to him. He's not perfect, but he's certainly smarter and more disciplined than my own self. He's been the best president of my 54-year lifetime, and as he learns, the best is (hopefully) yet to come.

SOURCES

http://www.ft.com/indepth/barack-obama-the-first-year

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fe2bb078-f89c-11de-beb8-00144feab49a,dwp_uuid=25fb01b4-397e-11de-b82d-00144feabdc0.html?nclick_check=1

"The Audacity to Win," by David Plouffe

"The Healing of America," by T.R. Reid

Published by Michael Thompson

Michael Thompson is a retired newspaper reporter who lives in Saginaw, Michigan. Main topics are political and social justice issues, with occasional escapism into sports and so forth.  View profile

5 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Nate Roderick1/25/2010

    At the risk of sounding elitist, the majority of our population cannot grasp the immeasurable complexity involved in governing a nation. The guy is a former constitutional law professor and a top graduate from Harvard Law. At least he is able to explain his decision making to the public, and he is measured in how he goes about it. Isn't he a whole lot better than that other guy..ol' what's his name... the funny cowboy guy. People don't see why he shouldn't have fixed all of our problems, most of which are results of decades of a) foreign policy, b) ruthless capitalism, and c) unsustainable financing (the list actually goes on). I mean, come on, the guy's had a year.

    Americans just like to have someone to root against. As for me, I haven't yet decided if I'm going to become a Republican or a Tea Party-er.

  • Shani Greene-Dowdell1/19/2010

    Agreed, doing too much at one time is better than sitting still. At least he is moving forward and keeping his promise he made to the American people to bring about change.

  • Orchiolum1/16/2010

    Without the stimilus package, I believe most of our financial institutions would have failed (some of the greedy b's did and still should in my opinion), we would have witnessed millions of additional mortgage defaults, perhaps millions more homeless, the return of the Depression soup lines...with clear possibilities of civil unrest and martial law as the America fell further into chaos. At least now we have a President who is articulate, speaks to us regularly, and isn't afraid of science. As usual, great writing Mike.

  • David A. Reinstein, LCSW1/12/2010

    It's a lose/lose situation for anyone who holds the Office. Damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

  • Lyn Lomasi1/12/2010

    Excellent article! My question to those who think he is doing too much: Is there even such a thing as doing too much when it's for the good of the people?

Displaying Comments

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.