Columbus Dispatch...
Underachievement
Debt-ceiling debacle and credit downgrade underline Obama’s weaknesses
Friday August 12, 2011 

On Friday Oct. 9, 2009, President Barack Obama won the Nobel Prize. Less than two years later, on Friday, Aug. 5, he presided over the first downgrade of the creditworthiness of the United States in a century. This resulted in a stomach-churning plunge in the New York Stock Exchange that sent shocks through the global economy. 

The trend line between these two points, 22 months apart, is not encouraging. And there are other discouraging data points along that line. When Obama took office, unemployment was 7.8 percent, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Today it stands at 9.1 percent, despite a $787 billion stimulus plan that Obama’s economics gurus said would hold joblessness below 8 percent. 

Over the eight years of the administration of George W. Bush, the national debt rose by $6.1 trillion, to a total of $11.9 trillion on Sept. 30, 2009. In just 22 months since, Obama has added nearly $2.7 trillion, for a total national debt approaching $14.6 trillion. At this rate, he could nearly match Bush’s spending binge in half the time. 

Even Obama’s major policy enactment is a political liability. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, his government takeover of the health-care industry, remains highly unpopular a year and a half after it passed, despite features that many people like, such as prohibiting insurance companies from turning away people with pre-existing conditions. 

As a result of the recent debt-ceiling debacle, even members of the president’s own party are questioning his ability to lead. New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd recently quoted an unidentified Democratic senator saying: “We are watching him turn into Jimmy Carter right before our eyes.” Some Democrats are debating whether Obama should face a primary challenge rather than coast to nomination for another term. 

All of this arises from a failure to lead. The debt-ceiling battle illustrated this. Was Obama intent on being remembered as the president who made the courageous decisions to reform unsustainable entitlements and began paying down the nation’s vast debt? No, what he really wanted was a “clean” increase in the debt ceiling, one that would allow him to continue spending borrowed money at a record-setting pace. 

When Congress refused to issue him such a blank check, Obama quickly showed that he would agree to any deal that would remove the debt-ceiling issue from the political radar before the 2012 election. In the end, he was rendered largely irrelevant as congressional leaders finally hammered out the deal that raised the debt ceiling in time to avert a shutdown of large portions of the government. And that deal marginalizes the president even further. A congressional panel is charged with proposing additional deficit reduction, and if the plan fails to win congressional approval, automatic cuts will occur. Either way, it is out of Obama’s hands and off his plate. His insistence on ensuring that the debt-ceiling issue not arise again until after 2012 suggests the president is more concerned with his re-election prospects than with solving the nation’s grave fiscal problems. 

During the 2008 presidential-election campaign, The Dispatch had this to say of the candidate: 

“A resume containing so little evidence of leadership and accomplishment leaves in question Obama’s ability to handle the most responsible and difficult job in the world, especially at a time when the nation faces a combination of problems so large and complex that they would challenge even the most seasoned leader.” 

In these difficult times, his leadership has been weak and his lack of experience is evident. 

Read it at the Columbus Dispatch