Obama’s Threat of Executive Action Won’t Help the Economy

The White House can talk all it wants about executive action but Congress still calls the shots on the big issues.

WASHINGTON, DC - NOVEMBER 21: President Barack Obama signs a bill in the Oval Office at the White House, on November 21, 2013 in Washington, DC. President Obama signed three bills titled H.R. 2747, Streamlining Claims Processing for Federal Contractor Employees Act, S. 330, HIV Organ Policy Equity Act, and S. 893, Veterans Compensation Cost of Living Adjustment Act of 2013. 
National Journal
James Oliphant
Jan. 20, 2014, midnight

The pres­id­ent re­cently has be­come fond of say­ing he has a “pen and a phone.” And while it’s tempt­ing to snarkily sug­gest that all he needs now is a laptop and a cof­fee mug to put him on the same level as every in­tern in Amer­ica, there is a prom­ise — or a threat — be­hind those words.

What Pres­id­ent Obama is really talk­ing about is power. Seni­or White House aides have pledged that this will be the “Year of Ac­tion” — and it’s a phrase the pub­lic will be hear­ing both be­fore and after the State of the Uni­on ad­dress next week and likely dur­ing it. The pen, aides say, is used to sign ex­ec­ut­ive or­ders, ac­tions to im­ple­ment policy in areas where Con­gress hasn’t le­gis­lated. The phone, they say, is used to rally sup­port, to bring in out­side groups from around the coun­try to push Con­gress to do more.

The White House sought to use that pres­sure earli­er this month when it im­por­ted some strug­gling Amer­ic­ans for an event to dram­at­ize the need to ex­tend un­em­ploy­ment in­sur­ance. But that event ex­posed the prob­lem with the phone, no mat­ter on whose desk it sits: The tac­tic didn’t work. Con­gress re­mains dead­locked over ex­tend­ing those be­ne­fits and a solu­tion, when or if it comes, won’t be be­cause of an ad­min­is­tra­tion photo-op. And it also re­veals the short­com­ings of the pen: Obama can’t ex­tend those be­ne­fits him­self. Those people are hurt­ing, and the pres­id­ent can’t do a thing about it.

That’s just one ex­ample, but it un­der­scores the chal­lenge the White House faces as it seeks to ap­pear pro-act­ive in the face of a do-little Con­gress. When ex­amples of ex­ec­ut­ive power and pres­id­en­tial au­thor­ity are used in the con­text of the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion, they’re of­ten cited by con­ser­vat­ives fear­fully wringing their hands about some per­ceived tyr­an­nic­al power grab. But there are real lim­its to what this pres­id­ent can do, es­pe­cially on the eco­nomy: le­gis­lat­ive ones, leg­al ones, prag­mat­ic ones. It means the ad­min­is­tra­tion has to talk big while walk­ing small or risk be­ing viewed as in­ef­fec­tu­al.

If the ad­min­is­tra­tion’s “Year of Ac­tion” rol­lout sounds fa­mil­i­ar, it’s be­cause this is an old product that’s been reshelved and wrapped in a new and im­proved pack­age. Ever since Re­pub­lic­ans took the House in 2010, Obama has been sound­ing the same note over and over again. “We Can’t Wait” was a battle cry forged dur­ing a Mid­west­ern bus tour three years ago when the pres­id­ent was try­ing to build sup­port for his Amer­ic­an Jobs Act. He gave speech after speech ur­ging Amer­ic­ans to press Con­gress to pass the le­gis­la­tion. The act, es­sen­tially a $450 bil­lion stim­u­lus pro­pos­al, rode a bul­let train to nowhere.

Since then, the ad­min­is­tra­tion has un­veiled a series of small-bore eco­nom­ic ini­ti­at­ives that, while well in­ten­ded, likely can only make a dif­fer­ence at the mar­gins. The first was a $4 bil­lion in­vest­ment in mak­ing build­ings more en­ergy-ef­fi­cient. The most re­cent came last week in North Car­o­lina, where Obama launched a pub­lic-private “in­nov­a­tion hub” in­ten­ded to de­vel­op tech­no­lo­gies that could even­tu­ally lead to new man­u­fac­tur­ing jobs. It wasn’t ex­actly the kind of dir­ect in­vest­ment in a “shovel-ready” in­fra­struc­ture job that Obama has long ad­voc­ated, something he con­ceded in his re­marks. “This is go­ing to be a long haul,” he said. A query to the White House about how many jobs had been cre­ated na­tion­ally by the “We Can’t Wait” pro­gram went un­answered.

But small ball may be the best game for the ad­min­is­tra­tion to play. Every time it has gone lar­ger, it has cour­ted con­tro­versy, as when the pres­id­ent uni­lat­er­ally de­cided to stop en­for­cing de­port­a­tion man­dates for cer­tain chil­dren of il­leg­al im­mig­rants, to al­low them to stay in the coun­try, or the in­dustry fur­or caused by the En­vir­on­ment­al Pro­tec­tion Agency’s new re­straints on coal-fired power plans.

And that’s an­oth­er reas­on ex­ec­ut­ive ac­tions are risky: Many lead to lit­ig­a­tion. Those EPA rules will likely be tied up in fed­er­al court, per­haps for years. Just last week, the Su­preme Court heard a chal­lenge to Obama’s re­cess ap­point­ments to the Na­tion­al Labor Re­la­tions Board — an ex­ec­ut­ive ac­tion that very well could be re­versed, to the ad­min­is­tra­tion’s em­bar­rass­ment. In the very same week, a fed­er­al Ap­peals Court in­val­id­ated Obama-era Fed­er­al Com­mu­nic­a­tions Com­mis­sion rules that re­quired In­ter­net ser­vice pro­viders to treat all traffic equally.

It might be no sur­prise, then, that when Obama’s press sec­ret­ary, Jay Car­ney, was asked last week wheth­er — as part of the “Year of Ac­tion” — the pres­id­ent would be even more ag­gress­ive on im­mig­ra­tion policy, con­sid­er­ing that re­form bills re­main stalled on the Hill, he de­murred. “The way to ad­dress all of these is­sues is through com­pre­hens­ive im­mig­ra­tion re­form,” Car­ney said — not, he im­plied, through uni­lat­er­al ac­tion.

Re­mem­ber, this is an ad­min­is­tra­tion that in­sisted it did not have the power to raise the debt ceil­ing by it­self, that asked Con­gress to rat­i­fy its de­cision to strike Syr­ia, that is now seek­ing its help to un­tangle coun­terter­ror­ism sur­veil­lance policy, and that has dragged out its ex­ec­ut­ive dis­cre­tion so long on ap­prov­ing the Key­stone XL pipeline that some Re­pub­lic­ans are try­ing to pass bills to force it to act.

Yes, the pres­id­ent has a pen, and it’s a nice one. But there re­mains the ques­tion of how much ink there’s really left in it.

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
When It Comes to Mining Asteroids, Technology Is Only the First Problem
14 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Foreign Policy takes a look at the future of mining the estimated "100,000 near-Earth objects—including asteroids and comets—in the neighborhood of our planet. Some of these NEOs, as they’re called, are small. Others are substantial and potentially packed full of water and various important minerals, such as nickel, cobalt, and iron. One day, advocates believe, those objects will be tapped by variations on the equipment used in the coal mines of Kentucky or in the diamond mines of Africa. And for immense gain: According to industry experts, the contents of a single asteroid could be worth trillions of dollars." But the technology to get us there is only the first step. Experts say "a multinational body might emerge" to manage rights to NEOs, as well as a body of law, including an international court.

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Obama Reflects on His Economic Record
15 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Not to be outdone by Jeffrey Goldberg's recent piece in The Atlantic about President Obama's foreign policy, the New York Times Magazine checks in with a longread on the president's economic legacy. In it, Obama is cognizant that the economic reality--73 straight months of growth--isn't matched by public perceptions. Some of that, he says, is due to a constant drumbeat from the right that "that denies any progress." But he also accepts some blame himself. “I mean, the truth of the matter is that if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken to the swing voter,” he said, “then we might have maintained a majority in the House or the Senate.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Reagan Families, Allies Lash Out at Will Ferrell
16 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Ronald Reagan's children and political allies took to the media and Twitter this week to chide funnyman Will Ferrell for his plans to play a dementia-addled Reagan in his second term in a new comedy entitled Reagan. In an open letter, Reagan's daughter Patti Davis tells Ferrell, who's also a producer on the movie, “Perhaps for your comedy you would like to visit some dementia facilities. I have—I didn’t find anything comedic there, and my hope would be that if you’re a decent human being, you wouldn’t either.” Michael Reagan, the president's son, tweeted, "What an Outrag....Alzheimers is not joke...It kills..You should be ashamed all of you." And former Rep. Joe Walsh called it an example of "Hollywood taking a shot at conservatives again."

Source:
PEAK CONFIDENCE
Clinton No Longer Running Primary Ads
19 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

In a sign that she’s ready to put a longer-than-ex­pec­ted primary battle be­hind her, former Sec­ret­ary of State Hil­lary Clin­ton (D) is no longer go­ing on the air in up­com­ing primary states. “Team Clin­ton hasn’t spent a single cent in … Cali­for­nia, In­di­ana, Ken­tucky, Ore­gon and West Vir­gin­ia, while” Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) “cam­paign has spent a little more than $1 mil­lion in those same states.” Meanwhile, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Sanders’ "lone back­er in the Sen­ate, said the can­did­ate should end his pres­id­en­tial cam­paign if he’s los­ing to Hil­lary Clin­ton after the primary sea­son con­cludes in June, break­ing sharply with the can­did­ate who is vow­ing to take his in­sur­gent bid to the party con­ven­tion in Phil­adelphia.”

Source:
CITIZENS UNITED PT. 2?
Movie Based on ‘Clinton Cash’ to Debut at Cannes
20 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The team behind the bestselling "Clinton Cash"—author Peter Schweizer and Breitbart's Stephen Bannon—is turning the book into a movie that will have its U.S. premiere just before the Democratic National Convention this summer. The film will get its global debut "next month in Cannes, France, during the Cannes Film Festival. (The movie is not a part of the festival, but will be shown at a screening arranged for distributors)." Bloomberg has a trailer up, pointing out that it's "less Ken Burns than Jerry Bruckheimer, featuring blood-drenched money, radical madrassas, and ominous footage of the Clintons."

Source:
×