The Trouble With Change
By Alan Stewart Carl | Related entries in 2008 Election, Barack, History, McCain, United States
Writing in the Los Angeles Times, Andrew J. Bacevich warns us not to expect big changes from the next president.
Bacevich’s reasons that the forces of large special interests, existing government commitments and allies and adversaries with strident self-interests will conspire to tie the hands of the next president. Bacevich is correct. If history has taught us anything it’s that presidents achieve far less than they promised and that the realities of governing tend to supplant the original vision of the president. Bill Clinton’s grand health care plan failed miserably. George W. Bush’s isolationist tendencies morphed into interventionalism. George H. W. Bush found himself raising taxes. That’s the way it is.
The U.S. government is a massive organization with intentionally dispersed power. Changing anything takes a lot of time and endless compromises. Even in foreign policy, an area in which the president has significant latitude, the matter is so tied up in existing conditions, treaties, agreements and rivalries that great change takes not only great will but a great amount of time as well.
As Bacevich concludes:
Will the tone and tenor of American diplomacy under either a President Obama or a President McCain differ from what we have seen over the last seven years? Yes, and probably in ways that most nations – and many Americans – will welcome. But no matter how much charisma or straight talk emanates from the White House, the world will remain stubbornly intractable.
In matters of substance, Big Change will remain elusive. The next president will leave his own imprint on U.S. policy. It just won’t be nearly as distinctive or dramatic as the most enthusiastic Obama and McCain supporters have talked themselves into expecting.
The next president will not be as great as supporters hope. But neither will he be as horrible as opponents fear. Is it wrong for me to take solace in that?
This entry was posted on Thursday, October 30th, 2008 and is filed under 2008 Election, Barack, History, McCain, United States. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
October 30th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
I suppose, considering the tone of this particular campaign, that this message bears repeating. And yeah, take solace in the fact that both of these men likely can’t help but be an improvement over the current POTUS. I certainly don’t count myself among those Obama supporters who cower in fear at the idea of President McCain. And my support for Obama would that much more conflicted if we were contemplating Vice President Romney/Ridge/Lieberman rather than She Who Must Not Be Named.
October 30th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
Barack Obama is going to win this election because of his eloquence, charm, charisma, and his appeal to your emotions. If he can maintain that, and his friends in the media can successfully convince Americans that things are generally better or positive, then he doesn’t need to change anything of significance, or fulfil any of his campaign promises.
If he continues to make Americans feel good, he will be fine. He could adopt a completely republican agenda and he could convince everybody its the right thing to do by smiling.
October 30th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
“She Who Must….” – are you frickin’ serious?!?
She’ll be a better VP than Hillary Cumstain would’ve been as prez…
October 30th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
Jimmy,
You need to wipe your chin now…
October 30th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Disagree Alan,
A couple of examples of what Bush was able to achieve with a bit of balls: 1. Persuaded the country to start a war when there really was no compelling reason to 2. Placed the office of President in as powerful a position as it has ever been
If he wins, Obama will pretty much be able to do whatever he wants for the first couple of years.
cheers!
October 30th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
I have tremendous respect for Andrew Bacevich. That man knows what is going on.
I think it is inevitable that the next president will not bring as much change as we hope. Much of the damage is structural weakness that has been exacerbated by 8 years of bush.
However, as you mentioned yourself, Obama is the better change. Lets start the slow process of putting this country back together.
October 31st, 2008 at 9:36 am
@Rich — She Who Must Not Be Named was actually a swipe at the OTT anti-Palinites (I consider myself moderate in that regard despite my antipathy). Thanks for leading with medulla though. Cumstain? Nice.
Question is, while Palin may be a better VP than President Cumstain would be a POTUS (limited damage and all that), does anyone think Palin would be a better POTUS? Double dog dare!!