Barack Obama’s first two missteps

Nothing in politics is ever perfect. Even a demigod like Barack Obama isn’t necessarily infallible. This past week has seen Obama stumble twice. First, there was an off-the-cuff remark about a conservative radio shock jock, and then the world’s outrage over a protectionist clause in a recent piece of legislation, which would block steel imports.

Telling Americans that they should listen less to Rush Limbaugh, a hardline conservative radio talkshow host, was simply unnecessary. Not only did it fly in the face of Obama’s repeated promises that he would be a post-partisan president, but it also fanned the partisan flames of Republicans. In the current political and economic climate, America can ill-afford a federal government that is divided or finds itself bogged down by petty partisanship.

The remark was also unnecessary, and inconsiderate, with respect to freedom of speech. Vile as he may be, Limbaugh has the right to express his views on his show, and Americans are just as free to listen to his program if they actually want to waste their valuable time. But no politician, least of all the president, should ever “advise” people on what they should or shouldn’t listen to, watch or read.

Not that Obama’s remark would ever persuade any regular Limbaugh listener to change his habits, but by going after Limbaugh in such a public fashion, Obama has achieved the exact opposite : at least for a week, Limbaugh’s public platform got considerably bigger, with the media hunting him down for soundbites. FOX News, of course, jumped right in with special features and one-on-one interviews with the man. This has resulted in a lot more exposure than Limbaugh warrants.

The second blunder came in the form of a Buy American clause attached to the recent U.S.$819-billion stimulus package, which has just been passed by the House of Representatives. The clause provides that only U.S. steel and steel products must be used in these stimulus projects, thus raising the spectre of protectionism. It reminded the world of the ill-fated Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act that triggered the Great Depression in the 1930s.

Canada was among the first to object to the clause, and since then it has become the number-one issue at the current World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Obama has shown some degree of willingness to rectify the situation, but the world is holding its breath while waiting to see how much sway the new president actually has with the U.S. Congress and his own Democratic Party.

There is nothing wrong with encouraging people to buy domestic products. But it should be only an encouragement, rather than a legally-mandated obligation. Since this current economic crisis originated in the U.S. and then spread around the world, America should take a more active role in spreading the remedy just as effectively. Curtailing stimulative effects at the American border through protectionism is not only the morally wrong thing to do, but it would also violate a series of international trade agreements and rules, such as those of NAFTA or the WTO.

If America were to make the same mistake as eighty years ago, it would force other countries to reciprocate, and often such response would not be proportionate at all. If America blocked one type of product, the rest of the world would counter with similar bans on five or more groups of American products. It would set off a vicious circle of trade wars that the world can well do without.

Leo Gerard, of the U.S. Steelworkers’ union, berated a Canadian reporter for what he perceived to be a “demeaning” question. Asked whether he and his union were happy with President Obama for being able to push through pro-union measures, Gerard denied that his union took such a narrow view of politics. Well, reality tells us differently. Union leaders are extremely narrow-minded inasmuch as they tend to look out only for their own interests, rather than what is good for their members or society at large.

This Buy American clause is just another example of accommodating narrow special interests that serves no purpose other than aggravating an already grim situation. Obama is too smart and too intelligent to let something like this go forward. But being a new and untested president, there is no guarantee that his own party’s legislators will listen to him. Many of them are obligated to the unions, as many Democrats have found their way into the U.S. Congress on a trail of union money. With re-election, and related fundraising, always at the forefront for U.S. politicians, it will be interesting to see whether Obama can assert common sense.