Obama’s Test Continues

Published in Takungpao
(China) on 7 February 2010
by Jin Yu (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Crystal. Edited by .

Edited by Alex Brewer

On January 20th 2009, Obama’s inauguration was held in the White House and he became the 44th president of the United States. As the first African-American president, Obama, calling for change, excited many around him. Hundreds of thousands of American people from around the country gathered at the national mall in Washington to view the historical moment. Many people still remembered his speech in Chicago’s Grant Park, repeating “change” and “Yes, we can.”

And now, a year later, as Obama’s glory is disappearing, several expectations of people in and out of America were smashed by cruel reality one by one. And Obama quietly changed his slogan into “Change is hard” and “Change doesn’t happen overnight.”

Then, what’s the problem with Obama’s administration? And what the future will be like?

A Series of Wrong Policies

Recently, many people began to guess Obama administration’s political strategy. As usual, Obama seems to be dealing with too many matters. Some people believe that he should put aside health care reform and devote his time to economic reform.

Yet some think that the present difficult position Obama’s administration finds itself in was not caused by ambition, but rather by political misjudgments and wrong strategies. For example, the economic stimulus plan was not strong enough and banking reform was not tough enough. As with the Reagan administration, Obama faced economic problems at the beginning of his term, but Obama hasn’t blamed it on the former administration in order to avoid public criticism. As for the stimulus plan, it’s no doubt the plan worked to some degree and without it the unemployment rate could have been much higher. At the same time, the limited governmental stimulus was not enough to raise employment rate in 2009.

Why was government stimulus not enough? Many economists have called government to implement an increased stimulus package. However, Obama’s top economic and political advisors concluded that a larger stimulus plan was not necessary for the economy and was not reasonable for politics. They may be right in terms of politics, but they were wrong about economy. No matter what caused the bad judgment, the government made the right move by paying attention to the stimulus plan’s success. The president and his team focused almost all of their efforts on this issue from the end of 2008 to the beginning of 2009. So it’s not that Obama administration did not pay attention, but they made the wrong move.

As for banking reform, we can make the same remark. Some economists defended the government and claimed the banking system was recovering. Even though these banks could not recover their credit capacity, the government’s policy toward the banking industry actually strengthened the large financial institutions that caused financial crisis. Simultaneously, it caused a strong link between the Obama administration and the banks. Because of the bailout and the Wall Street bonus issue, the government began losing public support.

Out of Reach Goals

A longtime American journalist, McManus, pointed out that the biggest problem in the Obama administration’s first year was that there had been too many goals but there was not enough power to achieve them all. Surrounded by flowers, acclaim and applause, Obama stepped into the White House with a long list of missions, from saving the economy to health care reform, from financial supervision to climate change, from a non-nuclear world to new partnerships, from troop withdrawal in Iraq to troop increase to Afghanistan, and he even tried to help Chicago win a bid to host the Olympics. On this list, significant problems like how to overcome the financial crisis were what Obama had to face, but there were still many problems added onto this list by the president himself. Realities improved enough for Obama to work up a healthy appetite for change, but Congress and the other administrative departments had a relative low digestive ability. As a result, the Obama administration was trapped in a worrisome vicious cycle: firstly, the president declared his great big political goals, but after that the executive branch could not fulfill the goals on time even though they tried their best in a hurry. So the president had to lower the standards to win a fake victory.

Stemming from the international financial crisis, the biggest achievement in President Obama’s first year was that the recovery of America’s economy was more and more obvious day by day; the economy grew at a pace of 3.5 percent in the third quarter. But experts warned that unemployment rate would grow to 10 percent and Obama himself admitted that the overall recovery’s still far away.

Facing Three Problems

In 2009, mission unfulfilled; in 2010, Obama is facing three big problems.

First, the economy. For the president and the Democratic Party, the worst thing would be a further recession of the economy which they would be responsible for. As in 2009, Obama will still strive to save the slowing economy and carry out an economic recovery plan. To win the hearts of people, Obama must solve problem of employment first.

Secondly, the war in Afghanistan is a focus at home and abroad. How to improve the situation becomes an important indicator of Obama’s foreign policy strategy. In 2009, American troops suffered high casualties, but the improvement of the situation was scarce and Taliban even made a New Year’s speech, challenging America publicly. Obama needs real victory to show the American people that his new Afghanistan strategy is not merely an empty talk.

Thirdly, the midterm elections in November, which will be President Obama’s first congressional election while in office, are generally deemed as an examination for Obama and the Democratic Party and a barometer for Obama’s reelection hopes. The result of the election not only will indirectly show voter attitude to Obama, but also may change the two parties’ powers in the Congress which will have a significant impact on Obama’s promises during his election and his appeals after he stepped into power.

Around the New Year, Obama showed his rarely seen strong attitude in reference to the Christmas terrorist attack attempt and his appeal for Haiti Earthquake aid. American weekly magazine Time said that with these two issues Obama wanted to show the world that he is a president who can defeat crisis. Obama, well-known for his wisdom, seems to have learned from his first year and is ready for challenges in the New Year.


奧巴馬政府「大考」未完

2010-2-7

2009年1月20日,奧巴馬在白宮宣誓就任美國第44任總統。作為美國歷史上第一位黑人總統,這位打著「改變」口號上台的總統,曾引發了全球罕見的「政治追星潮」。幾十萬美國民眾從全國各地自發聚集到首都華盛頓的國家廣場,只為目睹奧巴馬就任美國總統的歷史性時刻。許多人都記得他在芝加哥格蘭特公園發表勝選演講時一再強調的「變革」和「是的,我們可以」。

一年以後的今天,籠罩在奧巴馬身上的耀眼光環早已逝去,美國內外對奧巴馬的種種熱切期待已被一連串無情的現實逐一粉碎。奧巴馬也悄悄地把自己的口號改變成了「變革並不容易」「變革並非一夜實現」。

那麼,奧巴馬領導下的美國現任政府困在了何處?未來的形勢又會怎樣?

決策頻頻失誤

近來,許多人再次開始猜測奧巴馬政府的政治策略。按以往慣例判斷,似乎奧巴馬著手應對的事項過多了。一些人認為,他應該把醫療改革放在一邊,將精力全部集中在經濟問題上。

也有觀點認為,奧巴馬政府當前的困境並不是因為其野心太大造成的,而是源於政治判斷及決策失誤。如財政刺激力度太小、針對銀行業的政策不夠強硬等。奧巴馬並沒有像同樣在上任之初面臨經濟困境的里根總統那樣,將所有的責任歸結為先前執政政府而保護自身免受公眾指責。關於刺激政策,毫無疑問是發揮了作用的。如果沒有刺激政策,失業率將會較之當前水平更高,但同時,有限的政府刺激並不足以使就業在2009年實現增長。

為什麼說政府刺激動力不足呢?許多經濟學家都曾呼籲政府推行更大規模的刺激行為。然而,2008年12月,奧巴馬的首席經濟及政治顧問們作出總結,更大規模的刺激計劃從經濟角度講並非必須,而從政治角度講也並非合理可行。總統的顧問從政治角度所作出的判斷可能正確,但他們從經濟角度所作的判斷很明顯是錯誤的。然而,不管是由於什麼原因導致了這樣的判斷失誤,但政府對刺激政策的重視始終是對的。從2008年底到2009年初,總統及其團隊幾乎將全部精力都集中在這一問題上。所以說,奧巴馬政府並非沒有集中注意力,只是犯了決策錯誤。

關於政府在銀行業政策制定上的表現,我們也可以作出同樣評價。一些經濟學家為政府決策進行辯解,並聲稱銀行業正恢復到正常運營的軌道上來。然而,政府對金融行業「輕觸式」的做法事實上進一步鞏固了那些引起危機的大型機構,即使這些銀行無法恢復信貸。同時,此舉也給奧巴馬政府帶來了災難性的政治影響,由於對銀行業的救助以及隨後華爾街巨額獎金事件,政府已站在了不受公眾支持的一邊。

目標過於宏大

美國資深政治評論員麥克馬努斯指出,奧巴馬執政第一年的最大問題在於:目標太多卻力不從心。奧巴馬是在鮮花、喝彩和掌聲的簇擁下,揣著一份長長的「任務清單」走進白宮的,從拯救經濟到醫療改革,從金融監管到氣候變化,從無核世界到夥伴關係,從撤出伊拉克到增兵阿富汗,甚至於親自出面幫助芝加哥爭取奧運會主辦權……在這份清單上,克服經濟危機等重大問題是奧巴馬不得不面對的,但還有很多問題是總統自己加進去的。事實很快證明,奧巴馬的胃口太大,而國會和行政部門根本無力消化。於是,奧巴馬的執政模式陷入了一種令人擔憂的惡性循環:首先總統高調宣布宏大的政策目標,然後行政部門在一陣手忙腳亂之後發現根本無法如期兌現,於是總統最終不得不降低標準以謀求有名無實的勝利。

面對國際金融危機的大背景,奧巴馬就職一年來最大的成果,就是美國經濟復蘇跡象與日俱增,美國第三季經濟增長達到了3.5%。不過專家警告說,失業率將繼續攀升,美國人接近每十個人便有一個失業,奧巴馬自己也承認全面復蘇仍遠。

面對三個難題

2009年考核未達標。進入2010年,奧巴馬還要應對三項大考。

首先,處於第一位的還是美國經濟。對於總統和民主黨來說,最壞的事情莫過於經濟繼續惡化,並且他們將為此承擔責任。如同2009年一樣,奧巴馬仍將會把主要精力花在挽救衰退的經濟和推行經濟復蘇方案上面。而要想重新贏得民心,奧巴馬最先要解決的就是就業問題。

其次,是國內外都緊盯著的阿富汗戰爭。阿富汗戰爭能否和怎樣取得積極進展,是檢驗奧巴馬對外戰略的重要指標。2009年,美軍在阿富汗戰場上傷亡慘重但進展緩慢,以至於塔利班罕見地發表新年講話,公開與美國叫板。奧巴馬需要實實在在的勝利(無論是戰場上還是政治上),來向美國民眾證明其「經過深思熟慮之後」制定的阿富汗新戰略並非紙上談兵。

第三,是將於11月舉行的國會中期選舉。這是奧巴馬當選總統後的第一次國會議員選舉,被普遍視為對奧巴馬和民主黨的期中考試,甚至是奧巴馬能否競選連任的風向標。這項選舉結果不僅將間接體現選民對奧巴馬政府的態度,而且更重要的是有可能改變兩黨在國會的勢力對比,從而對奧巴馬競選時的許諾和執政後的號召形成關乎成敗的影響。

新年前後,奧巴馬在應對聖誕節炸機未遂案和援助海地地震災區兩大事件上顯現出前所未有的強勢姿態。美國《時代》周刊的評論認為,奧巴馬是要通過這兩件事情向美國和世界表明:他是一位能夠戰勝危機的總統。以睿智著稱的奧巴馬似乎已從第一年的實踐中汲取了經驗教訓,並為迎接新一年的挑戰做好了準備。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Germany: Donald Trump’s Failure

Mexico: Urgent and Important

Austria: If This Is Madness, There is a Method to It

El Salvador: The Game of Chess between the US and Venezuela Continues

Spain: State Capitalism in the US

Topics

Austria: The US Courts Are the Last Bastion of Resistance

       

Poland: Marek Kutarba: Donald Trump Makes Promises to Karol Nawrocki. But Did He Run Them by Putin?

El Salvador: The Game of Chess between the US and Venezuela Continues

Austria: Donald Is Disappointed in Vladimir

Austria: If This Is Madness, There is a Method to It

Germany: It’s Not Europe’s Fault

Germany: Donald Trump’s Failure

Canada: No, the Fed Was Not ‘Independent’ before Trump

Related Articles

Germany: It’s Not Europe’s Fault

Spain: State Capitalism in the US

Thailand: Appeasing China Won’t Help Counter Trump

India: Will New US Envoy Help to Repair Ties under Threat?

France: Global South: Trump Is Playing into China’s Hands