Should Blacks Be Satisfied with Obama’s Jobs Speech?

obama congress

President Barack Obama addresses a Joint Session of Congress in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., Sept. 8, 2011. Vice President Joe Biden and House Speaker John Boehner are seated behind the President. (Official White House Photo by Chuck Kennedy)

“I reject the idea that we need to ask people to choose between their jobs and their safety. I reject the argument that says for the economy to grow, we have to roll back protections that ban hidden fees by credit card companies, or rules that keep our kids from being exposed to mercury, or laws that prevent the health insurance industry from shortchanging patients. I reject the idea that we have to strip away collective bargaining rights to compete in a global economy,” Obama added. “We shouldn’t be in a race to the bottom, where we try to offer the cheapest labor and the worst pollution standards. America should be in a race to the top. And I believe we can win that race.

President Obama discussed the need to rebuild America, and how our crumbling infrastructure puts the country at a disadvantage when compared to its competitors. “Everyone here knows we have badly decaying roads and bridges all over the country. Our highways are clogged with traffic. Our skies are the most congested in the world. It’s an outrage,” Obama said.

“Building a world-class transportation system is part of what made us a economic superpower. And now we’re going to sit back and watch China build newer airports and faster railroads? At a time when millions of unemployed construction workers could build them right here in America?” the president asked.

President Obama also invoked President Lincoln, the founder of the Republican Party, who was responsible for the Transcontinental Railroad, the National Academy of Sciences, and the first land grant colleges. And he used a Republican folk hero to make a case for a government role in investing in society.

“Ask yourselves — where would we be right now if the people who sat here before us decided not to build our highways, not to build our bridges, our dams, our airports? What would this country be like if we had chosen not to spend money on public high schools, or research universities, or community colleges? Millions of returning heroes, including my grandfather, had the opportunity to go to school because of the G.I. Bill. Where would we be if they hadn’t had that chance?” the president asked the crowd.

And finally, President Obama addressed economic inequality, the need for fairness in the tax system and for the rich and corporations to pay their fair share and help the economy. “I’m also well aware that there are many Republicans who don’t believe we should raise taxes on those who are most fortunate and can best afford it,” the president said.

“But here is what every American knows: While most people in this country struggle to make ends meet, a few of the most affluent citizens and most profitable corporations enjoy tax breaks and loopholes that nobody else gets. Right now, Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary — an outrage he has asked us to fix,” Obama noted.

Should we keep tax loopholes for oil companies? Or should we use that money to give small business owners a tax credit when they hire new workers? Because we can’t afford to do both,” the president said. “Should we keep tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires? Or should we put teachers back to work so our kids can graduate ready for college and good jobs? Right now, we can’t afford to do both.”

President Obama is at his best when he is in campaign mode and speaking to his base with populist themes. Without question, he employed this strategy to a certain degree. Yet, simultaneously the president’s address was an exercise in compromise — compromise with Republicans who are less popular than the president, and whose policies are unsupported.

For example, Obama borrowed the GOP talking points on reducing the deficit, during a recession, by cutting so-called entitlement programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. This, even as the majority of the public blames Bush for the nation’s economic woes and calls for a tax increase for the wealthy, as opposed to cuts to Medicare and Medicaid.

In addition, in his address Obama failed to discuss the impact of globalization, as unfair trade deals dump foreign products on U.S. shores, and corporate incentives ship jobs out of America’s urban centers to cheaper labor markets in Asia.

The president’s progressive critics point to his tendency to cave in and give away the store to his adversaries, essentially compromising away his bargaining chips before the compromise even begins. Some poignant examples include the administration’s failure to fight for a public option or single payer system in health care reform, and the recent abandonment of plans to toughen Bush-era EPA smog regulations in light of Republican opposition.

Obama’s first economic stimulus was helpful and kept the U.S. out of a depression, but was inadequate to life the economy out of the doldrums. He identified the need for a second stimulus in December 2009, yet did not fight for one.

Now, with a jobs bill consisting mostly of tax cuts, the president seems eager to embrace and legitimize the economic philosophy of his adversaries. Granted, many of the tax breaks Obama proposes are of a more stimulative variety. Republicans should support it because it incorporates some of their favorite ideas.

But there is a chance the GOP-controlled Congress will reject the half-measure at face value, if their stone-faced, applause-free reaction to his speech is any indication. In that case, Obama would have been better served to propose a more vigorous, multi-trillion-dollar stimulus package to bring jobs to the millions of jobless Americans. Perhaps such a proposal would fail in Congress as well. Nevertheless, without putting up a fight and making his best case to the public, we will never know.

Moreover, the first black president, who made conspicuous appeals to the black community during the 2008 election, has been M.I.A. on the crisis of black unemployment — or at least in speaking out on the problem in public. Given the devastating impact of the recession on urban communities, Congresswoman Waters demanded that the president care as much about unemployed black people, including 45 percent of black youth, as Iowa swing voters.

“I wanted him to say something about the intolerable rate of unemployment in the African-American community. He didn’t quite get there,” Waters told CBS News after the speech. “But he talked about long-term unemployed, he talked about disadvantaged youth.”

“I would have had even bigger plans, but it was a big plan and it included some of the ideas we have been pushing,” she added.

Perhaps the president’s African-American critics expect too much when they demand that he explicitly mention black unemployment. Then again, he owes them a great deal. Blacks are the most reliable and faithful constituents in the Democratic base. They will not defect to the hostile territory on the other side, particularly with Barack Obama as the occupant of the White House.

David A. LoveHowever, the 2012 election is nigh. And if unemployment remains chronically high — as it likely will be, jobs bill or no — President Obama may have to deal with an unenthusiastic black electorate that stays home on the Election Day.

Meanwhile, the other side caters to their base, which includes the Tea Party, billionaires and hard right wing values voters. From time to time, the president needs to show that he cares about black people, as symbolism can go a long way.

David A. Love
Commentary by David A. Love


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *