The risk for President NObama
BY: Brian Hughes
February 7, 2015 | 5:00 am
President Obama, after
kicking off the new Congress by issuing a record number of veto threats,
faces a growing risk of being isolated politically for saying “no” to
virtually every proposal pushed by his Republican opponents.
It’s a new era for a president who vetoed just two bills in his first six years. Obama has unleashed nearly a dozen veto threats in the last month alone. With Republicans now in control of the Senate, Obama doesn’t have the luxury of the chamber’s majority leader keeping bills from his desk.
It’s a new era for a president who vetoed just two bills in his first six years. Obama has unleashed nearly a dozen veto threats in the last month alone. With Republicans now in control of the Senate, Obama doesn’t have the luxury of the chamber’s majority leader keeping bills from his desk.
Obama’s path forward is rather
tricky. He would like to flex executive muscle to burnish his legacy but
doesn’t want to get tagged with the very obstructionist label he has so
often assigned to Republicans.
Though Obama has effectively straddled those competing tasks so far, it could become more difficult as Republicans craft a more comprehensive strategy for isolating the president.
“There is definitely a political risk,” said Jeremy Mayer, a political scientist at George Mason University, pointing to Republican president Gerald Ford, whose political demise was attributed to an excessive number of vetoes. “If the mood of the country moves toward the Republicans, and Obama is the last hold-up, I think he’ll be hurt.”
However, Obama and the Democrats now have a tool at their disposal that could shield the president from meeting a similar fate as Ford: an expanded use of the filibuster.
As showcased in recent days, Democrats in the upper chamber can still protect Obama by filibustering measures that don’t reach the 60-vote threshold, such as a bill to roll back the president’s executive action on immigration.
There’s far less political downside to issuing a veto threat than actually blocking legislation passed by both chambers — or even worse, having a veto overridden.
The president’s veto strategy in 2015 has been fairly predictable, as most of the threats have involved efforts to either roll back his unilateral actions or repeal policies enacted by his administration, such as Obamacare.
The president also knows that it’s rare for a presidential veto to be overridden by Congress, should it come to that moment.
The more problematic scenarios for Obama are initiatives like the Keystone XL pipeline, which have broader bipartisan support and don’t carry his name.
“If Republicans use their majority in a sensible way, it could really put Obama in a bind,” Mayer said. “But right now, they don’t seem to have a plan for getting things through the Senate.”
White House officials insist that the veto threats have not harmed the president politically, saying GOP officials are clearly sending bills to Obama that he has no choice but to block.
“They continue to use this as a political tool,” said White House press secretary Josh Earnest of the type of legislation now being crafted by conservatives. “Republicans take these symbolic votes that don’t actually don’t actually do anything.”
And Obama aides say Republicans shouldn't complain about having no White House partner, given the lack of receptiveness for the president's proposals on Capitol Hill. Just recently, GOP leaders immediately declared the president's budget as dead on arrival.
Yet, Republicans see a clear shift in the political narrative, one that will become even more pronounced, they argue, if Obama continues to say "no" to their ideas.
“When we just had the House, we didn’t have the megaphone we have now,” said Matt Mackowiak, a Republican strategist and former Senate staffer. “A lot of the bills that just previously sat in the Senate had bipartisan support. He risks being seen in more partisan terms than Republicans and viewed as unproductive and unhelpful. This also bolsters the idea that he has no idea how to negotiate."
Though Obama has effectively straddled those competing tasks so far, it could become more difficult as Republicans craft a more comprehensive strategy for isolating the president.
“There is definitely a political risk,” said Jeremy Mayer, a political scientist at George Mason University, pointing to Republican president Gerald Ford, whose political demise was attributed to an excessive number of vetoes. “If the mood of the country moves toward the Republicans, and Obama is the last hold-up, I think he’ll be hurt.”
However, Obama and the Democrats now have a tool at their disposal that could shield the president from meeting a similar fate as Ford: an expanded use of the filibuster.
As showcased in recent days, Democrats in the upper chamber can still protect Obama by filibustering measures that don’t reach the 60-vote threshold, such as a bill to roll back the president’s executive action on immigration.
There’s far less political downside to issuing a veto threat than actually blocking legislation passed by both chambers — or even worse, having a veto overridden.
The president’s veto strategy in 2015 has been fairly predictable, as most of the threats have involved efforts to either roll back his unilateral actions or repeal policies enacted by his administration, such as Obamacare.
The president also knows that it’s rare for a presidential veto to be overridden by Congress, should it come to that moment.
The more problematic scenarios for Obama are initiatives like the Keystone XL pipeline, which have broader bipartisan support and don’t carry his name.
“If Republicans use their majority in a sensible way, it could really put Obama in a bind,” Mayer said. “But right now, they don’t seem to have a plan for getting things through the Senate.”
White House officials insist that the veto threats have not harmed the president politically, saying GOP officials are clearly sending bills to Obama that he has no choice but to block.
“They continue to use this as a political tool,” said White House press secretary Josh Earnest of the type of legislation now being crafted by conservatives. “Republicans take these symbolic votes that don’t actually don’t actually do anything.”
And Obama aides say Republicans shouldn't complain about having no White House partner, given the lack of receptiveness for the president's proposals on Capitol Hill. Just recently, GOP leaders immediately declared the president's budget as dead on arrival.
Yet, Republicans see a clear shift in the political narrative, one that will become even more pronounced, they argue, if Obama continues to say "no" to their ideas.
“When we just had the House, we didn’t have the megaphone we have now,” said Matt Mackowiak, a Republican strategist and former Senate staffer. “A lot of the bills that just previously sat in the Senate had bipartisan support. He risks being seen in more partisan terms than Republicans and viewed as unproductive and unhelpful. This also bolsters the idea that he has no idea how to negotiate."
No comments:
Post a Comment