Forthrightness and Ability to Compromise Distinguish Obama
By Louis Sallerson, Columnist
In the Democratic race for the presidential nomination this year, supporters of both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have a lot to be optimistic about. The two candidates running for this year’s nomination are generally acknowledged to be good, hardworking and intelligent individuals whose various platform disagreements seem to be minor. Generally speaking, supporters of the respective candidates would be comfortable with a party led by either of the two rivals; the likelihood that the Democrats will splinter over resentment between the Hillary and Obama camps is slim. If defeated in the primaries, Democrats in both camps would put their force and effort behind their former enemy to do battle with the Republicans for the big prize in November.

Since the margin of difference between the candidates is infinitesimally small in almost all meaningful areas of policy and party loyalty, my reasons for supporting Obama are not the stuff of sweeping condemnations. My rationale for favoring the Illinois senator is much more thinly elusive and difficult to grasp. An anecdote might best illustrate why I consider Obama an inspirational figure who will best serve this nation in the White House.

One morning, before leaving for high school, I was reading The Chicago Tribune, and my eyes were drawn to a story about Obama and his efforts to reform education. The article said that Obama was in favor of merit pay and higher salaries. Merit pay is the creation of financial incentives to reward teachers based on their ability. Having had my share of lazy teachers who were plainly in the school system for the easy salary, I was a strong supporter of this program. The major sticking point to putting the merit pay system into effect is consistent opposition from teachers’ unions, which staunchly contest any proposal meant to tie educator pay to their performance. The suspicions of the teachers’ unions made supporting merit pay a risky proposition for Democrats, who are largely beholden to that powerful special interest entity.

The article went on to describe a speech that the Illinois senator had made at a teachers’ union dinner. In his speech, Obama first told the group of educators that he would be in favor of legislation to increase teacher salaries, which was an integral part of his education plan. After the predictable applause that followed this statement, Obama, instead of simply moving on and hiding the fact that he favored merit pay, quickly silenced the crowd by declaring that teachers had to be responsible for their abilities and performance in the classroom. The assembled teachers watched the rest of the speech in silence, and left with a divided response. However, by going before an interest group as powerful among the Democratic orthodoxy as the teachers’ union and defying them on one of their seminal issues, Obama demonstrated that he possesses political courage of the highest order. Obama has the ability to overcome the politician’s natural inclination to tell a crowd what it wants to hear, a quality sadly lacking in many of the rest of our presidential candidates (Mitt Romney, I’m looking at you). Obama’s speech to the teachers’ union is a shining example of the type of politics that needs to become more prevalent throughout the country.

With the problems that we have at the moment in critical areas like education, the environment and health care, there are no longer any easy solutions. Every feasible solution has its drawbacks; more money for education means higher taxes, combating global warming means less industrial output, at least in the short run. The American people face the looming specter of hard trade-offs, and we need a leader who can forge compromises among different factions. We need someone who will not bend to political pressure from special interests that are resistant to change. We need a leader who is tough enough to tell auto makers that increased fuel efficiency standards are necessary for the planet and will in the long run help them to compete with Japan. We need someone to make the case to Americans that universal health coverage will be worth the cost. We need a president who will level with us about the challenges we face and then will unite disparate interests to meet them.

When I look at Clinton, I do not see this same sort of strong-willed but reasonable political figure. I see an old cog in the Democratic political machine who will fight to the death against the Republicans in getting her way and will not stop until she has violently pushed through the legislation that she wants. This is why I prefer Obama.

One might call this logic thin and personality- based. But demeanor and approach can be the difference between a passed bill and a filibuster, and between progress and stagnation. We have seen enough of divisive, Rovian partisan politics over the past seven years, and the polarization that it has engendered in our country. The U.S. is ready for meaningful reform, and Obama represents change we can believe in.

Issue 16, Submitted 2008-02-13 03:19:58