The State of the Union address is perfect for President Donald Trump. His showmanship and sense of dramatic timing; the endless applause and moving stories, lovingly told; the pleasure he takes in enunciating truths no one could disagree with—it’s almost as if the whole cockamamie tradition were designed just for him.
In fairness, the president has delivered competent speeches and refrained from his customary ferociousness, both last night and in his 2017 address. He delivers a good set speech.
And there were some genuinely praiseworthy moments in last night’s speech. He rightly called for the end of a nonsense budget rule that shortchanges spending on the federal government’s most necessary priority—defense. He rejected the fiction that the United States can remain vigilant in the war on international terrorism and close the Guantánamo Bay detention center. The president again urged Congress to rewrite the Iran nuclear deal and praised Iran’s democratic protesters. He called sustained and eloquent attention to the twisted brutality of the North Korean regime. And vowed to remain vigilant in the fight against ISIS, even as there is ample evidence that the administration is making good on that vow.
At other points in the address, we were sure we were listening to a Democrat. (“Because you were,” we hear our waggish readers respond.) Trump urged Congress to “invest” in “workforce development” and “job training”—i.e. more government programs that do for private companies what they won’t do for themselves as long as taxpayers are willing to pay for it. The president called for a “bill that generates at least $1.5 trillion” for infrastructure: in other words, a stimulus bill almost twice the size of Barack Obama’s disastrously wasteful and ineffective 2009 stimulus. And perhaps worst of all, he said nothing about the nation’s $20 trillion debt or the entitlement programs driving that debt. A dumbfounding and discouraging omission by a Republican president.
As for the State of the Union address itself, it has long since lost any usefulness. It’s a risible affair. No segment of the American public enjoys or appreciates it. The compulsory applause between every line turns the address into an incoherent mess that lasts twice as long as any political speech should. And the spectacle of Democrat and Republican lawmakers using body language to signify approval or disapproval of every phrase in the speech—clapping or not clapping, standing or staying seated, cheering radiantly or affecting gloom—gives the whole occasion a ludicrous air.
No State of the Union speech, we suspect, has ever been memorable to normal people. The only interesting parts are the president’s now obligatory testimonials to the ordinary heroes, the special guests sitting with his family. These people should have their own event and be showcased at some more appropriate and less pretentious medium.
So in addition to the president’s many proposals, we have one of our own: Get rid of the State of the Union address.
