Polarization In Washington

Anyone who has been following the health care reform debate in the U.S. will be aware of how deeply divided and polarized the United States currently is. The debate has gone from discussing the issues of health care reform to analyzing the motives of those who are opposed to parts of the reform. There are some, like former President Carter, who attribute racism to some, if not much, of the opposition. The media of course loves this. Discussing racism is much more interesting to viewers than going through the provisions of a 200 plus health care reform bill. So the same panelists are dragged out every night on CNN ( David Gergen, James Carville, Mark Williams, Roland Martin etc.) to engage in a "knock em out, sock it out" argument about racist Americans. It's like a school yard fight. Students are much more interested in watching the fight and cheering on the combatants, then paying attention to reading, writing and arithmetic.

I find the racism charge somewhat overblown. Of course there are some persons in the United States who are racist and who do not like the President for this reason alone. This is similar to the argument that there are some people who are anti-Semites and who do not like Israel for this reason alone. But the argument that all criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic is akin to the argument that all of those who oppose the President are racist. The fact that the President was elected by millions of white Americans and had a personal approval rating of close to 70% at one point seems to belie the racist theory. Did their approval of the President drop about 20 points because these people suddenly became racists or are they simply not happy with the President's performance?

There might be several reasons for the current polarization in the United States and it is undoubtedly not a new phenomenon. I would suggest one possible reason, and it is something I have commented upon before. It is President Obama's own rhetorical style or message. If you have been a follower of President Obama both during the primaries, the campaign and now his Presidency, you will realize that a major talking point of his is "change". Well change from what? To paraphrase the President from a variety of his speeches (and I do this from memory) it is change from the "failed policies and phoney arguments of the past". It is about cleaning house, getting rid of the " corrupt culture of Washington", getting rid of "corruption", "special interest group influence", lobbyists, tired old politics as usual, old distractions, political games, and so on. It is about "repairing" America's image abroad, and undoing the mistakes of the past. It's about fixing the disasters "inherited" from those who have gone before.

Now if you happen to be one of those people responsible for the bad old America, you are unlikely to take these comments well. If you were part of the previous Administration, or even part of the earlier Congress, which got America into its mess, you are unlikely to be pleased. If the President was looking for your support in fixing all the things that you had broken, he can forget it. As a previous administrator, I can tell you that the last thing you want to hear from your successor is how terrible a job you did and how the institution you led is now corrupt, bankrupt, and in need of major repair.

There is another way of course. You can be a bit more humble, gracious and if nothing else politically savy. The successor can talk about building on the strengths of the institution he inherited, on its past successes, on the important reforms which had been brought in, on the institution's excellent reputation and so on. You can congratulate and commend your predecessors for their hard work, rather than demean them either overtly or implicitly by pointing out how bad things had become under them and how hard they made it for you to get things back on track.

Unlike what some of you may think, I do not "hate" Obama. I think he is intelligent, a gifted orator, has some good policies, and is well-intentioned in terms of doing what he thinks needs to be done. However, I find his style of debate, in terms of the types of messages he sends, annoying, self-indulgent, arrogant, and, worst of all, counter-productive. America finds itself deeply divided and I do not think the President's message is likely to bring people together.