Obama’s First Term: A Romantic Oral History

Nadav Kander for The New York TimesClockwise from top left: Joseph R. Biden Jr., vice president; Desirée Rogers, former White House social secretary; Jon Favreau, speechwriting director; Rahm Emanuel, former White House chief of staff; Valerie Jarrett, senior adviser; David Axelrod, former senior adviser.

Four years ago, on the eve of Barack Obama’s inauguration, this magazine devoted nearly an entire issue to a photo essay, “Obama’s People.” The photographs, 52 of them, depicted a team arriving on a wave of hope despite inheriting an economy in trouble, a collapsing auto industry, two wars and a continuing terrorist threat.

Four years later, they have met some of those challenges, been daunted by others and created new ones of their own. The economy is better but still anemic. Osama bin Laden is dead and the Iraq war over, but Afghanistan remains a morass and the prison at Guantánamo Bay remains open. The auto industry has been saved and health care expanded, but national debt has soared. A dictator in Libya has been toppled, but a dictator in Syria slaughters his own people undeterred.

Roughly half of the people in the photo essay are now gone, some embittered by realities they did not anticipate or cast aside by a president cutting losses. The gauzy hope of 2009 has faded into the starker realism of 2013. The Washington they promised to transform is as divided as ever. As the president prepares to take the oath of office for a second term, his team looks back at the four years that brought them to this point. Told in their own voices, the story is, unsurprisingly and perhaps out of necessity, a romantic one.

Melody Barnes, director of the White House Domestic Policy Council (2009-11): I remember coming out of the transition office the day before the inauguration, and it was like walking into a street festival. It was sunny, and people were happy, and there were tons of people, and it was very, very festive.

Desirée Rogers, White House social secretary (2009-10): We had a certain amount of time to prepare the home for the first family. Someone asked me, “What side of the bed does the president sleep on?” I’m like, Yikes, I don’t know if I know that. For people that look like me, for my race, to be there and to have witnessed that — I just kept thinking about my grandfather and how he would feel had he lived to see this day, because in so many instances the gentlemen that served the president looked like my grandfather.

During the swearing in of the president, Chief Justice John Roberts mangles the words in the oath.
Gregory Craig, White House counsel (2009-10): This opinion from the Office of Legal Counsel says that if the president does not say all the words of the oath, then he is not president of the United States. I said, “Is there anybody over there that really thinks he’s not president?” David [Barron, acting head of the Office of Legal Counsel] said: “No, no, no, we all think he is president. But there may be a judge somewhere, or some hearing could be called on this, or it could be a problem in the future.” I thought, We gotta fix this. There was a long line of people waiting to shake hands with the president in the residence. We said, “Mr. President, can we talk to you a second?” There was a little bit of, “You gotta be kidding.” I said, “I’ll call the chief justice’s chambers and see if he can come down.” The chief justice carried his robes, and the president arrived. The chief justice goes into the corner and says, “This is a ceremonial occasion, I’m going to put on my robe.” The chief justice is doing it from memory again, and I thought to myself, Would it be wrong for me to go forward and say something? At which point, the president says, “Now, let’s keep this real slow.” They did it, and that was it.

Shortly after taking office, Obama decides to sign a large spending bill with thousands of earmarks to avoid undercutting Congressional support for his $800 billion stimulus package. In doing so, he helps establish an image of himself as a big spender.
David Axelrod, White House senior adviser (2009-11): He was very much of a mind to veto the bill. We were in the midst of trying to pass the Recovery Act, and some of his legislative folks said, “Mr. President, you can veto the bill, but if you do, you jeopardize our ability to pass the Recovery Act.” He was very frustrated. He just kind of glared, and he ultimately sort of nodded. I’m not sure he even said anything. But I know in retrospect that was probably one of the decisions he regretted the most.

In March 2009, after a sharp debate among his advisers, Obama decides to bail out the auto industry.
Rahm Emanuel, White House chief of staff (2009-10): All the advisers were divided, the public was absolutely against it. Nobody is giving you consensus, there is no consensus. Nobody had ever done what we were about to do. And he picks the hardest option.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: January 19, 2013

A collection of pictures on Page 36 this weekend with an article about President Obama’s first term includes members of the administration or key players during Mr. Obama’s first term; not all of them are members of the administration. Also, the pictures tinted blue represent either members of the administration or key players who are planning to leave or who have already left — not only those who have left.

And Ken Salazar, who is not shown as one of those leaving, announced after the magazine had gone to press that he was stepping down as Secretary of the Interior, as expected.

View the original article here

Historic first: Not one Dem elected to statewide office

(PNI) Sorting through the election debris:

The failure of Democrats Paul Newman and Sandra Kennedy to be re-elected to the Arizona Corporation Commission has been largely overlooked. In fact, it marks an extraordinary historic event.

As a result, in 2013, for the first time in Arizona history, there will not be a single Democrat holding a statewide elected office.

Since 1912, there has always been at least one Democrat elected to statewide office -- U.S. senator, governor, secretary of state, attorney general, superintendent of public instruction, mining inspector or corporation commissioner. As of January, after 100 years, there will be none.

This may come as a shock to some Democrats, who are being told that demographic trends in Arizona are improving their electoral fortunes. The principal demographic trend supposedly doing that is an increase in Latino voters.

According to the national exit poll, Latinos in Arizona were 18 percent of the electorate this year. They overwhelmingly voted for Barack Obama over Mitt Romney, 74 percent to 25 percent. Yet, as of this writing, Romney was winning the state by 11 percentage points.

This isn't new. In 2010, the Latino vote also went overwhelming to the Democratic candidate for governor, Terry Goddard, over the Republican incumbent, Jan Brewer, 71 percent to 28 percent. Yet Brewer carried the state by 12 percentage points.

We've been inundated by press releases and news accounts about impressive efforts to register and turn out the Latino vote in Arizona. Yet Republican Jeff Flake will be Arizona's next U.S. senator and Joe Arpaio, who has been as much of a stimulus for Latino political activism as one human being could possibly be, was comfortably re-elected as sheriff.

The national situation may be different, although I suspect not nearly as much as the current hand-wringing assumes. But in Arizona, there is very little evidence that a surge in Latino voting is making the Democratic Party a more potent force.

In fact, just the opposite. The Democratic Party is a rapidly shrinking presence in Arizona politics.

Republicans have generally held steady in their voter-registration figures in the face of the true rising force in Arizona politics, the independent voter. Democrats have been hemorrhaging registrants.

For this presidential election, there were 69,000 fewer registered Democrats than there were in 2008. In 1998, Democrats had a registration advantage over Republicans in 12 of Arizona's 15 counties. Today, they have an advantage in just seven.

What leaves me dumbfounded is that Democratic leaders in Arizona seem completely unconcerned about this. They don't even acknowledge that the party has a problem that needs to be addressed.

If not having a single statewide elected Democrat for the first time in 100 years doesn't shake them out of their lethargy, probably nothing will.

The drop in Republican numbers in the Legislature is being taken as a sign of weakened electoral support. That's a misanalysis. Instead, it highlights how much Republicans overachieved in 2010.

In 2010, Republicans achieved a veto-proof Legislature, with 21 of 30 seats in the Senate and 40 of 60 seats in the House.

This turned out not to mean anything. There were not even any attempts to override a veto. When the governor is of your own party, things are worked out in different ways.

Having a veto-proof majority is highly unusual. In fact, since one-man, one-vote in the 1960s, it had never been achieved by either party in the Senate. It had happened only three times before in the House.

Republicans have a registration advantage in 17 of the 30 state legislative districts. So, the natural distribution of power is 17-13 in favor of Republicans in the Senate and 34 to 26 in the House.

It looks like that is exactly what the split will be in the Senate. No Senate candidate for either party successfully bucked a registration disadvantage.

There are still a lot of votes left to be counted, but at this writing, Republicans were leading for four House seats in which they have the registration disadvantage and Democrats in only one. In the House, Republicans will probably have 36 to 38 seats. That's outperforming their registration advantage and more seats than they had in either 2006 or 2008.

Perhaps I'm just deluding myself to keep from becoming too disillusioned with our democracy. But it seems to me that voters generally look past the clutter, garbage and crap the campaigns toss at them and decide elections on broad, important things.

In the presidential race, I think they did so again, but

on something that's missing from the national postelection analysis gabfest.

The exit poll suggests that Romney didn't make his case that he would be materially better on the economy or fixing the finances of the federal government than Barack Obama.

So, people were left with a lot of financial distress and anxiety in a sluggish economy with uncertain prospects.

Obama clearly stood for the proposition that government should be willing to help. Romney clearly stood for paring back what government does, except for the military.

Given the lack of belief that Romney would really improve the economy, swing voters didn't want to give up government as a source of potential help.

That and a potent ground game, I think, decided the election.

Copyright 2012 The Arizona Republic|azcentral.com. All rights reserved.For more information about reprints & permissions, visit our FAQ's. To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Posted

View the original article here

Wisconsin Democrats running first recall ad: ‘Walkergate’ - Washington Post

???initialComments:true! pubdate:02/27/2012 11:24 EST! commentPeriod:14! commentEndDate:3/12/12 12:24 EDT! currentDate:2/26/12 7:0 EST! allowComments:true! displayComments:true!Posted by Rachel Weiner at 11:24 AM ET, 02/27/2012

The Wisconsin Democratic party is releasing its first ad in the recall campaign against Gov. Scott Walker (R) Monday.

“Walkergate” compares a John Doe investigation into current and former Walker aides to the Watergate scandal, juxtaposing news clips about the probe with coverage of the 1970s Nixon scandal.

Petition signatures to recall Walker were filed earlier this year, in response to legislation that eliminated collective bargaining rights for many public employees. Those signatures have yet to be certified, but a recall election against the governor is likely to take place later this year.

As that fight goes forward, prosecutors are investigating four aides and appointees of Walker’s from when he was Milwaukee County executive. Two Walker appointees have been charged with embezzling funds intended for veterans; two aides were charged with illegal fund-raising.

“There are many similarities by Watergate and Walkergate,” said Wisconsin Democratic Party Chairman Mike Tate on a conference call with reporters, saying Walker “has given a blizzard of contradictory statements about what he knew and when he knew it.”

Walker says he is not a target of the probe, but he has hired two defense attorneys and is meeting with prosecutors.

Former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk and state Sen. Kathleen Vinehout have already entered the Democratic primary to take on Walker.

Democrats would not disclose the amount of money being spent on the “Walkergate” ad, saying only that it’s a rolling buy in multiple markets.

Walker Press Secretary Tom Evenson said the ad was full of “lies and distortions” and that the governor “immediately addressed any issues of misconduct when brought to his attention. ... The character assassination being conducted by Madison Democrats and big-government union bosses in this ad shows they are grasping at straws.”

Walker has been airing ads since the recall petition drive kicked off last fall; he has already raised and spent millions. The political action committee Americans for Prosperity, funded by the billionaire libertarian Koch brothers, has already put hundreds of thousands of dollars into ads supporting the governor.

A recent poll showed Walker leading all likely challengers.

Nia-malika Henderson 

Felicia Sonmez 

Dan Balz 

Sandhya Somashekhar 

Robert Barnes 

Philip Rucker 

David A. Fahrenthold 

Ed O'keefe 

Melinda Henneberger 

Felicia Sonmez 

Carol D. Leonnig 

Glenn Kessler 

Philip Rucker; Dan Balz 

Rachel Weiner 

Eric Yoder 

View the original article here

Senate Passes Its First Portion of Obama's Jobs Plan (The Atlantic Wire)

A bill giving businesses tax credits for hiring military veterans became the first part of President Barack Obama's sweeping American Jobs Act to pass the Senate on Thursday. It's also the first bit of jobs-bill cooperation for the Senate in a while, Politico notes. After Republicans blocked the American Jobs Act as a whole back in October, Democrats tried to introduce it piece by piece, but the two bills they've brought to the Senate floor have both failed. Earlier on Thursday, Democrats scored some retribution on the Republicans by defeating its alternative jobs plan. But later, in an especially rare bit of bipartisanship, the vote to approve the veteran-hiring bill (on the eve of Veterans' Day, no less) was 94-to-1, with only Sen. Jim DeMint, a South Carolina Republican, saying the government shouldn't "privilege one American over another when it comes to work." DeMint's counterpart, Lindsey Graham, had the quote of the day, however, with this pep talk: "There is more potential [for bipartisanship] than people realize. You just got to want it."

View the original article here

The Obamas Give First Stump Speeches of the 2012 Campaign (The Atlantic Wire)

The Obamas delivered 2012 stump speeches at Democratic National Committee fundraisers in Miami and and Los Angeles Monday, reminding supporters that "We are not done," as the first lady said. President Obama is working to win back the Democratic donors who've soured on him since 2008, reminding them that "Big changes don't happen overnight.... The reason we're here today is because our work is not done."

Barack Obama's first stop was at a $10,000-a-plate dinner at the home of Samsonite's former CEO Steven Green, who also served as Clinton's ambassador to Singapore. Then he hit the "Obama Victory Fund 2012 Kick-Off Reception," which cost between $250 and $2,500 a ticket. Then he moved on to a dinner event at the home of J.P. and Maggie Austin, which cost attendees $35,800 per person, CBS4 reports. Meanwhile, Michelle Obama went on her first fundraising trip without the president, speaking at two fundraisers, filming a guest spot on the Nickelodeon show iCarly, and sitting on a panel with Second Lady Jill Biden and J.J. Abrams and urged Hollywood to portray the military in a more positive light.

Related: Is Nancy Pelosi Getting Sidelined by Steny Hoyer?

Both Obamas' addresses sounded like stump speeches. They ticked off the president's accomplishments on health care and financial regulatory reform. "Oh, and along the way," Barack Obama reminded donors, "we did a few other things" like repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell and appoint two women to the Supreme Court. Some liberals are pretty frustrated with the president, and both Obamas insisted the president had faced an uphill battle. "It’s going to be long," the first lady said. "It is going to be hard. I joke, did you ever think Barack Obama was going to be easy? Was there ever anybody here who just thought he’d just trounce in and fix everything, Barack Obama?"

Related: Dems Form Group to Rake in Secret Donations

The Obamas have some work to do in reassuring donors, The Wall Street Journal's Carol E. Lee and Jonathan Weisman report. Hillary Clinton supporters, especially, are reluctant to bundle contributions from friends, and even reelection adviser David Axelrod acknowledges donors have been neglected. "I don't think we have been particularly attentive to the so-called care and feeding of donors," Axelrod told The Journal. "I think it was largely a function of the fact that the president and everybody around him was absorbed in dealing with some fairly significant challenges."

Related: Here Comes the Government Shutdown

But rekindling donor romance has not always been easy, The Journal says. Take this incident, for example:

At a recent gathering of major donors here, former National Economic Council Director Larry Summers, who headlined a breakout session on the economy, got into an exchange with a donor that resulted in the man walking out of the session, according to people at the event.

The donor told Mr. Summers that he'd had trouble getting approved for a loan, according to people present. After the man repeatedly returned to his personal troubles, Mr. Summers said that no one at the conference--where attendees were asked to raise $350,000--was experiencing the kinds of financial difficulties faced by ordinary Americans. The man got frustrated and left the room, people at the event said.

Tuesday Obama will be in Puerto Rico for another fundraiser. Puerto Ricans gave $4 million in federal campaign donations in 2008, $354,000 of them to Obama, ABC News' Devin Dwyer reports. Obama is the first president to honor the island with an official visit since John F. Kennedy went in 1961. Dwyer writes,

The symbolism of the trip might hold the greatest significance for Obama and Democrats, however, generating goodwill with the booming Puerto Rican population living inside the United States, particularly Florida, where they can cast presidential ballots next fall.

Fewer grumpy donors there, perhaps.

Related: Obama: I Don't Have Horns

Want to add to this story? Open Wire.

View the original article here