Gene Healy

[Print]  [Email]        

The president talks too much

By: Gene Healy
Examiner Columnist
February 24, 2009

A week ago today, Barack Obama signed the largest spending bill in U.S. history. Yesterday he hosted a "fiscal responsibility" summit at the White House (a guilty conscience, perhaps?). Tonight, President Obama will deliver his first State of the Union address and issue a new round of lavish demands on the public purse.

In recent weeks, the president has been anywhere and everywhere, with a campaign-style blitz of media appearances and town hall meetings.  But, hard as it is to imagine in this era of the omnipresent president, there was a time when presidents weren't seen much and were heard even less.  There might be a lesson there for Obama.

Our founding fathers didn't want a president who'd perpetually pound the bully pulpit.  They viewed presidential speechifying as a sign of demagoguery, and thought Congress should take the lead on most matters of national policy.  They expected the nation's chief executive to pipe down, mind his constitutional business, and keep his hands to himself.

The "permanent campaign" that dominates modern presidential politics would have appalled our forefathers. Accepting the 1844 Democratic nomination, James K. Polk described the custom of the time: "the office of president of the United States should neither be sought nor declined."

When 19th-century candidates spoke publicly, they sometimes felt compelled to apologize, as 1872 Democratic contender Horace Greeley did, for breaking "the unwritten law of our country that a candidate for President may not make speeches."

From Washington to Jackson, presidents gave about three speeches a year on average. In his first year in office, President Clinton gave over 600. Things have changed, but it's not clear they've changed for the better.

Obama's address tonight isn't technically a State of the Union (SOTU) address, purists insist, since he's only been in office a month.  But with members of both Houses and the Supreme Court in attendance - standing to clap for every outsized promise - it will look and quack like one.

In early SOTUs, presidents rarely went on at Castro-like length.  George Washington's first SOTU was a humble affair, just over 1000 words, devoid of imperious demands for congressional action.

That wasn't humble enough for President Thoma Jefferson, however, who disapproved of his two predecessors giving the SOTU in person before Congress assembled.  Jefferson saw that practice as "an English habit, tending to familiarize the public with monarchical ideas," much like the British king's "speech from the throne."

So our third president wrote out his SOTU speeches and had them hand-delivered to Congress.  The Jeffersonian custom held for over 100 years, until the power-hungry Woodrow Wilson overthrew it.  Of 219 SOTUs, only 71 have been delivered in person.

It's hard to imagine the camera-and-mike-hungry Barack Obama simply "mailing it in."  But maybe he ought to think about making himself a little scarcer and pounding the pulpit less.  If the president became less frantically visible, that might benefit the country and the president himself.

Today's president is a constitutional monstrosity: a national talk-show host with nuclear weapons.  When the president dominates the airwaves, promising to cure all manner of economic and social ills, that leads the public to expect a presidential rescue plan for anything that ails the body politic.

The predictable result is an executive branch that rides roughshod over congressional prerogatives.  The mortgage bailout Obama announced last week is a case in point, since the bulk of the plan, which has enormous repercussions for the U.S. economy, is being enacted without any action by Congress. A less vocal, less omnipresent president might help us right the constitutional balance of powers.

Moreover, it's not clear that all this speechifying is doing the president himself much good.  After Obama announced his housing plan, one headline writer put it this way: "Obama Speaks, Market Listens, Sells Off."

When there's no escape from our national talk-show host-when he appears constantly above every gym treadmill-is it any wonder that we typically want his show cancelled just a few seasons in?  Is it any wonder we get sick of him?

There was wisdom in the old ways.  A president who talks less might be able to make his words matter more. And a president who promises less might be able to deliver more of what he promises.

Examiner columnist Gene Healy is a vice president at the Cato Institute and the author of “The Cult of the Presidency.”




To view this site, you need to have Flash Player 8.0 or later installed. Click here to get the latest Flash player.


Most Popular Headlines





 


 



 

Reader Comments

All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Examiner or its staff. Comment box is limited to 250 words.

Gene Healy Says Too Much

Feb 24, 2009

You spilled all this ink over the fact that Obama is communicating with his constituents? Get a life. Why don't you put a lid on it yourself?

 

New In Town

Feb 24, 2009

Words of wisdom from the Neo-Con Examiner. This must be the official paper of the Republican Party. I am new here and have read this paper for a couple of months nows. Its a free paper or else I would want my money back. I mean really. This is a newspaper and offers no opposing point of view. Shameful. You say the President talks too much. Its nice to have a President who can talk. My God. This newspaper is so much in the tank for the Republican party its laughable.

 

Do your homework

Feb 24, 2009

Read Healy's book. He was saying the same thing during Bush's tenure. It's the office, not the party.

 

Ralph Foston, Jr

Feb 24, 2009

I resent the reference to F. Castro by columnist G. Healy. I would also remind healy that president Obama received a large majority of the popular vote. Those of us voted for him dont mind hearing from him as often as posible.His words matter to me no matter how many they are. He is not a phony like our last excuse for a prexy.

 

jhh

Feb 24, 2009

This writer does not strike me as having any special insights as to what the Founding Fathers - who were not of one mind of the best way to run the country - were thinking. And what harm to have a president who is letting us see what he is trying to do? The previous administration was not nearly as transparent. Give me Obama's "Fireside Chat" style any day. I want to know what my leaders are doing and thinking.

 

I DID My Homework

Feb 24, 2009

So BUSH talked too much? I don't think so. This column delivers a stupid point. And you'd have to put a gun to my head to make me read an entire book by Gene Healy.

 

New In Town & Not Able to Read

Feb 24, 2009

New In Town, So, when someone argues that a Democratic Legislative Branch should not cede as much power to a Democratic Executive, you read that as NeoCon? Insightful, that. The point is not liberal or conservative, R or D, it is about the separation of powers. I certainly enjoy the fact that, for the first time in eight years, we have a President who can speak in complete sentences. That is not the point. The point is that the President should not be a treacly cocktail of 1 part Jesus, 2 parts Dr. Phil. And that every now and again, it may be time for him to leave the dais and get some real work done.

 

Brian Moore

Feb 25, 2009

Gene Healy says "I don't like having an overly powerful executive" and someone calls him a neo-con? Do you people even know what that word means?

 

El Growler Grande

Feb 25, 2009

Why is it that liberals refuse to be educated? At least it certainly seems that way.

 

Thomas D

Feb 26, 2009

Good God, most of the commenters here are idiots. You people can't even understand the argument that's being made in this short column, let alone actually make salient or relevant points against it.

 

enlighten us

Feb 26, 2009

Curious how all thomas did was call people names and never told the commenters what he felt the opinion was about. I personally agree with jhh. I don't think a lot of people know what our founding fathers wanted although they pretend to know and I would like to have my president communicate with the country.

 


Post a comment


Email:
(This will not be displayed or shared. Privacy Policy)

Display Name:

Comment:




Sports

Graphic surveys NFL players concerning concussions

NFL union pans commissioner's call for players to report on teammates' possible concussions

The NFL Players Association opposes commissioner Roger Goodell's call for players to tell their teams' medical staffs if they think a teammate shows symptoms of a concussion, saying that is not an adequate solution. Full story

Economy

NC state treasurer issues gift ban for employees, limits on soliciting for charity

State Treasurer Janet Cowell unveiled new rules Friday banning employees from taking gifts from companies that do substantial business with the agency and setting a limit on charitable solicitations. Full story

Entertainment

Pedro Almodovar discusses his childhood, his influences and what he won't put on film

Sex. Drugs. Prostitution. Pedophilia. Rape. Pedro Almodovar has been able to translate some of the most delicate subjects to the big screen with grace and humor. Full story