The 2012 presidential election campaign unofficially kicked off last night with Barack Obama's State of the Union address.
In his address, Obama showed that he had assimilated some of the lessons from the drubbing that his party took in the midterm elections last November. Back was the emphasis on bipartisanship and working together, symbolically emphasized by seating arrangements at the address that did not separate representatives and senators by party, but placed Republicans and Democrats side-by-side.
The focus of Obama's address was on innovation and education again, issues that are today's equivalent of "motherhood and apple pie". Who can, after all, oppose better education as a basis for increased competitiveness?
Obama also tossed some bouquets to the opposition by promising a simplified tax code and a reduction in corporate tax rates (Obama has been making a pitch to the business community of late). Obama has been criticized for downplaying American exceptionalism and the American dream and he took pains to cite his own success and that of House Speaker John Boehner as proof of American exceptionalism.
In the portion of his address dealing with education, the president graciously acknowledged that some of the recent improvements "were developed, not by Washington, but by Republican and Democratic governors throughout the country."
Divisive issues such as immigration were subtly blended into the main thrust on innovation and competitiveness: "Today, there are hundreds of thousands of students excelling in our schools who are not American citizens. Some are the children of undocumented workers, who had nothing to do with the actions of their parents…Others come here from abroad to study in our colleges and universities. But as soon as they obtain advanced degrees, we send them back home to compete against us. It makes no sense."
If Obama proved conciliatory on some of the details, the State of the Union address as a whole and the reply by the Republican Chairman of the Budget Committee Paul Ryan revealed a yawning philosophical gap between Obama and the Republicans.
If one had to pick a major sound bite from the State of the Union address, it was the following: "This is our generation's Sputnik moment. Two years ago, I said that we needed to reach a level of research and development we haven't seen since the height of the Space Race.".
The Soviet Union's ability to be the first to place a satellite into space and then send up a man's orbiting vehicle in the 1950s was a shock to the Americans and galvanized a concerted response. The federal government launched a crash program that focused on science education. Billions poured into universities and into education in general.
Obama is calling here for a similar effort today because this is the only way that the United States can compete against China. As Alexis deTocqueville already noted in the 19th century, there is no substitute for governments in gigantic projects, such as war, that require total mobilization of manpower and resources in an emergency. The space race was such a project and now Obama is saying that the restoration of American competitiveness is its parallel, requiring similar mobilization.
It is not only in education that the government will assume direction Obama spelled out the targets of the concerted effort
"We'll invest in biomedical research, information technology, and especially clean energy technology – an investment that will strengthen our security, protect our planet, and create countless new jobs for our people."
The next step, he continued, is to convince individual and corporate consumers to buy the products into which the government is pouring massive resources:
"Now, clean energy breakthroughs will only translate into clean energy jobs if businesses know there will be a market for what they're selling. So tonight, I challenge you to join me in setting a new goal: by 2035, 80% of America's electricity will come from clean energy sources. Some folks want wind and solar. Others want nuclear, clean coal, and natural gas. To meet this goal, we will need them all – and I urge Democrats and Republicans to work together to make it happen."
Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin was chosen by the Republicans to respond to Obama. Ryan, although only 40, is serving his 7th term in Congress and is recognized as the Republicans economic expert.
When the Republicans fought Obama's legislative agenda, the Democrats charged that the Republicans were simply the party of no and had no idea or philosophy of their own, so now that they control the House, the Republicans must prove them wrong.
Ryan is also a Midwestern Catholic and represents regionally and ethnically what may prove to be the battleground of the 2012 elections. The Republicans were taking a risk, because Ryan is on record as advocating reform of the Social Security system, including increasing the retirement age to 70. In fact, In the last few days, the Democrats launched a softening up barrage against Ryan, zeroing in on the Social Security issue in the expectation that they could convince senior citizens to turn against the Republicans.
Ryan did not refer to Sputnik but to what was taking place in Western Europe:
"Just take a look at what's happening to Greece, Ireland, the United Kingdom and other nations in Europe. They didn't act soon enough; and now their governments have been forced to impose painful austerity measures: large benefit cuts to seniors and huge tax increases on everybody."
If the United States does not get a grip on its spending and accumulated debts, the next generation will inherit "a diminished country," he asserted.
Responding to the thrust of Obama's address and the need for the government to invest in education and the industries of the future, Ryan said pointedly that the government is not the best judge of these matters, as can be proven by Obama's stimulus:
"All of this new government spending was sold as 'investment'. Yet after two years, the unemployment rate remains above 9% and government has added over $3 trillion to our debt.."
Ryan singled out the health care bill that the Democrats passed in the last Congress and which the Republicans have vowed to repeal as an example of job-killing federal legislation that only increased government intervention, as lobbyists descended on Washington asking for exemptions. It is not the government's job, he said, to pick winners and losers.
Countering Obama's penchant for ever bigger government Ryan called for a renewed commitment to limited government Under this approach, the spirit of initiative - not political clout - determines who succeeds."
Ryan was careful to add that in addition to its traditional role, government should "provide a safety net for those who cannot provide for themselves." But there he noted the difference between a safety net and a hammock. Tthe Democrats' policies sought "totransform our social safety net into a hammock, which lulls able-bodied people into lives of complacency and dependency."
The battle lines have been drawn and the American people will now judge. Both sides correctly divine that economics is the crucial topic and foreign policy has been shunted aside. On the issue of home grown terrorism, Obama gave it short shrift by referring to extremism rather than Islamic fundamentalism, which means that the United States will continue to handle it as a law enforcement issue, with the knowledge that American Muslims are part of the community.