State of the Union

As some of you might know, Wednesday, January 27th, the President of the United States gave the annual State of the Union address.  This is a chance for Obama (and all previous presidents) to address Congress and the nation, to inform them of changes he expects to see, to offer encouragement, to get people talking, to address issues, etc.

I both watched the speech and read the transcript, annotating as I went.  I support the President, but I also support questioning everything.  Many of his proposals I support, but some I do not.  I voted for him (proudly), but that does not mean that I will not offer a critique of him.  Likewise, my offering a critique does not mean that I do not support him, it means that I will question everything.  Without further ado, here is my summary/commentary on the State of the Union 2010.  It will probably be long, but I hope you enjoy nonetheless.  At the very least, enjoy it more than you would spending more than an hour actually watching the thing.
_______________________________________________________

The first part of the speech is basically the beginning of every uniting speech.  It talks about the reason for the State of the Union, gives examples of how America is the shit (the whole we've-been-through-a-lot-and-are-still-here stuff).  A bit of reminding everyone of how terrible it was when Obama took office - though interestingly, he does not say Bush once in the entire speech.  This is a fact; I triple checked it myself.  This is, of course, to set up being able to talk about how he knows what's going on and is trying to help.  There are a few quotes on how Wall street is the bad guy and Main Street isn't, and a lot of talking about how the American people don't want to put up with politics as usual.

Then, he moves on to the first topic of the day: the economy.  He mentions that the bank bailouts are unpopular with everyone, but acknowledges their necessity.  To get the money back from the banks, a fee is proposed.  Taxing the companies you gave the money to instead of the people - what a novel idea!  Then Obama talks more about job creation; the jobs that have been created and such.  

"That's why we extended or increased unemployment benefits for more than 18 million Americans; made health insurance 65 percent cheaper for families who get their coverage through COBRA; and passed 25 different tax cuts. Now, let me repeat: We cut taxes. We cut taxes for 95 percent of working families. We cut taxes for small businesses. We cut taxes for first-time homebuyers. We cut taxes for parents trying to care for their children. We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for college."

Does anyone have the stats on this?  But, seriously, I want actual stats, not media stuff.  If anyone gives me something from Faux News, I will explode in your face.  Anyway, then Obama says he wants more job creation stuff, which is always good.  So, I put my support behind that.

Mentions of the Recovery Act (stimulus bill).  Things on how it worked, etc.  A note form me here: don't comment on if it didn't work.  We won't be able to know that for a while, so whatever you are reading that says it did or didn't work aren't accurate.  They are just speculation, and many times they are driven by partisanship.  The good news is that the GDP grew substantially last quarter, which is a great sign.  Now, this does not mean the recession is over; it means that it could be declining.  We won't know if the recession is "over" for a while, but this is a sign that it could be ending.  Anyway, back to the speech.

Obama then goes on with stating that he knows people aren't seeing results as fast as they'd like, so there is still frustration.  This is where he explicitly calls for a new jobs bill.  Please, Congress, listen.  Then he proposes taking $30 billion of the money that the banks pay back (he calls them "Wall Street banks," again separating Main and Wall Streets) and giving it to community banks to then give to small businesses.  He also proposes a small business tax credit.  Also, he mentions using some of the new jobs to create things that compete with the world: " There's no reason Europe or China should have the fastest trains, or the new factories that manufacture clean energy products."  Please, please, please create high-speed railways.  I would pee myself.  Mild threat to Congress: 

Now, the House has passed a jobs bill that includes some of these steps. As the first order of business this year, I urge the Senate to do the same, and I know they will. They will. People are out of work. They're hurting. They need our help. And I want a jobs bill on my desk without delay.

Mentions of trade agreements that open global markets and strengthen trade relations.  Personally, I hope that we move toward fair trade instead.

Moves to discuss education.  Stuff on importance of education, blahblahblah.  Urges renewal of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.  I have no problem with this, but renewing something that's been around since 1965 isn't going to cause major changes.  It's been around for 45 years.  It's nice, but we need something new.  Then Obama proposes a tax credit to families for four years of college and an increase in Pell Grants, among other things:

To make college more affordable, this bill will finally end the unwarranted taxpayer subsidies that go to banks for student loans. Instead, let's take that money and give families a $10,000 tax credit for four years of college and increase Pell Grants. And let's tell another one million students that when they graduate, they will be required to pay only 10 percent of their income on student loans, and all of their debt will be forgiven after 20 years – and forgiven after 10 years if they choose a career in public service, because in the United States of America, no one should go broke because they chose to go to college. And by the way, it's time for colleges and universities to get serious about cutting their own costs because they, too, have a responsibility to help solve this problem.

I love the last line.  I hope you're listening, universities.

Other proposals to the middle class: double the child care tax, giving access to a retirement account to every worker, expanding tax credit for those who start a retirement fund, refinancing to make mortgages more affordable.

Onto health care.  Well, first, mentioning that First Lady Michelle Obama is taking on the problem of childhood obesity.  It's a huge problem, no pun intended, so I applaud her.  Alright, the health care bill.  Obama mentions that the Congressional Budget Office has deemed that the bill will bring down the deficit.  I've seen these stats, so I will confirm that.  He also invites anyone - from either party, though we all know he's talking to Republicans - who has a better idea to come forward.  I enjoyed this part.  Let's be real here, most Americans support health care reform, just not necessarily this one.  People generally understand that this is a needed change.  Yet conservative politicians ignore this and simply oppose anything that comes out without adding anything themselves.  Oppose a public option?  Fine, but come up with something yourself, and don't just be the party of "no."

Then we move back to the economy, this time through government spending.  Obama talks about Bush (though, again, without mentioning him by name) and then goes on to defend his own spending by deeming it necessary to get us out of the recession.  While I mostly agree, I can't help but wonder if every single penny spent went to helping.  Anyway, to get back that money, he proposes a spending freeze, starting in 2011.  "Spending related to our national security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will not be affected," he adds.  Let's keep that in mind, shall we?  I don't want to hear lies about this in the future, and I am looking at you, Faux News.

He mentions they are looking for ways to cut back, and have already found $20 billion in savings.  Now, I want to know (for the future) what he is cutting.  Surely that'll play into government transparency as well.  He also calls for a bipartisan fiscal commission, like the one proposed (and shot down 53-46 [it needed 60 to pass]) by Senators Judd Gregg (R) and Kent Conrad (D).  I've looked, and I can't find anyone who has given a statement on why they didn't vote for this.  Obama gives an executive order for this to go forward.

Now, a question I had when Obama first said this freeze would start in 2011 was "why not now?".  Here, he answers: because "we can't address the deficit or freeze government spending when so many are still hurting."  He answers strikes from both sides here, and I'll copy it instead of paraphrasing:

Now, I know that some in my own party will argue that we can't address the deficit or freeze government spending when so many are still hurting. And I agree -- which is why this freeze won't take effect until next year when the economy is stronger. That's how budgeting works.  But understand – understand if we don't take meaningful steps to rein in our debt, it could damage our markets, increase the cost of borrowing, and jeopardize our recovery – all of which would have an even worse effect on our job growth and family incomes. From some on the right, I expect we'll hear a different argument – that if we just make fewer investments in our people, extend tax cuts including those for the wealthier Americans, eliminate more regulations, maintain the status quo on health care, our deficits will go away. The problem is that's what we did for eight years. That's what helped us into this crisis. It's what helped lead to these deficits. We can't do it again. 

Then he says what might be the most controversial statement in the speech.  Obama criticizes the recent Supreme Court decision.  "OMG! The president has never done that!" screamed media outlets.  My answer: so? 

Obama is allowed to disagree with people, and he’s allowed to state that disagreement.  I’ve stated my disagreement, why can’t he?  Plus, this is something that needs to be addressed.  The Supreme Court decided that something in a bill that was a bipartisan effort (McCain-Feingold) is unconstitutional.  Obama disagrees.  I’m going to assume that McCain, and one of the authors of the BCRA, does as well.  Now Obama is urging Congress to do what they did before and fix some of these problems – so what?  He is allowed to do that, I support him doing that, and I hope that Congress will fix it as well.  My only concern is that people will cry “unconstitutional” again – even though the Constitution is supposed to apply to citizens (individual people) of the nation, not to corporations.

Back to American frustrations with "politics as usual" in Washington.  Obama urges against that.  As much as I agree, the major problem is that the politicians who are elected today are ideologically more extreme than the politicians of yesterday.  The “old” politicians were centrists; they were willing to compromise and talk.  Those politicians today are extremists who believe what Obama touches on here: “that if you lose, I win.”  As much as I love words, words alone are not going to stop this belief.  Electing centrists, not extremists, is.  Getting people into the government who listen and not just argue will help.  Just asking people who don’t want to listen to do so isn’t.

Security talk.  There's not much there, really just mentioning that they will increase it.  Then we move to Afghanistan.  While Obama mentions the pull-out date of July 2011, he does not give a plan.  I want to hear a plan, damn it.  He also mentions pulling troops out of Iraq by August.  After that, they'll probably be send to Afghanistan (that statement was me, not him).  More mentions of supporting the troops not only overseas, but also when they get home.  I'd like to personally add that this means psychological care also, something that has been forgotten over the past decade.

Nuclear arms talk. One statement that stands out to me is that we need to secure "all vulneralbe nuclear materials around the world in four years, so that they never fall into the hands of terrorists."  To me, terrorists aren't the only ones who shouldn't have nuclear arms.  Mentions of consequences to nations (North Korea, Iran)  who violate international agreements when it comes to nuclear weapons.  I wonder what kind of consequences.

Further pushes on prosecution of those who violate civil rights and employment discrimination, as well as violations of equal pay laws.  Here is one sentenc e that has also become the subject of debate: " This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are."  In other words, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."  Quick mention of immigration laws and securing our borders, again in just a sentence.

Then we go into the feel-good stuff that he leaves us with.

_______________________________________________________

So there you go: the State of the Union.  Debates and comments welcome.