Pressing issues may eclipse the push for change in Washington
The 2008 Presidential election buzzed with discussions of change, as the candidates referred to it as a motto or a scapegoat, a pathway or an excuse. The American electorate has become excited about the concept of changing Washington by cleaning up the political process. More Americans see real faults in Washington and demand that they be rectified, as an increasing number of voters perceive a gap between themselves and the government that represents them. A recent CNN poll conducted prior to the election showed that only 34 percent of Americans approved of the parties’ current leadership, while 27 percent felt that they were not being listened to. While issues of transparency and political reform may have played well politically in energizing the electorate, these concerns will likely prove subordinate to a series of more pressing policy challenges that confront the new administration.
The Age of the Lobbyist
The undue influence of lobbyists and a lack of transparency in the political process are among the most pressing concerns of Americans demanding reform. According to Steve Weissman of the Campaign Finance Institute, “the American public detests lobbyists.” Over time the perception has evolved that congressmen and presidents have become dangerously close to large business and special interests. From Vice President Cheney’s role with Halliburton, to the proliferation of wasteful earmarks on the congressional floor, the American people have seen their elected officials work for their perceived enemies, such as big oil and tobacco’s interests.
Furthermore, in the last eight years the public has become more concerned with the level of secrecy and a lack of accountability in the government’s dealings. David Arkush of Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy organization, remarked in an interview with the HPR, “there is a widespread perception that ordinary people’s interests are overrun by lobbyists from corporate special interests…and that it’s almost inevitable that ordinary people’s interests will be sacrificed.”
Time for Change?
After this year’s election, promises of limiting the reach of lobbying and special interests seem more real than ever before, as both presidential candidates made reform a vital part of their agendas. Obama constantly attacked McCain’s ties to lobbyists, while McCain focused on cutting “pork-barrel spending.” Weissman points out that despite these promises, transparency concerns are likely to take a back seat to discussions of increasing healthcare coverage and securing American jobs in an increasingly uncertain economic landscape. He points to “opinion priorities” that confront the President and Congress. While the American electorate wants its government to work for it instead of masked corporate interests, the question of how intensely the public feels about these issues is debatable. “With a sinking economy and wars in the Middle East, cleaning up Washington may not be a top priority,” Weissman commented.
Additionally, despite campaign promises, politicians know it is not in their interest to completely sever their ties to business and lobbies. Lobbyists can be useful sources of information and advice, and many politicians depend on them for access to information about key constituent groups. David Brady of Stanford’s Hoover Institution told the HPR that the current economic situation means there is no alternative to a government relationship with the business community and that any demand for such by the public is impossible. “At the end of the day,” he noted, “Americans want an economy that grows in which they can prosper…and if reform is associated with such results, they will support it. But they won’t necessarily demand it.”
The new presidential administration will be forced into a fine balancing act on its reform agenda as it attempts to realize its campaign rhetoric while confronted with serious constraints on its political capital and resources. Given the prevalence of larger concerns like an economic slowdown and an unpopular foreign war, the reform agenda may become less important to Americans if they perceive that the federal government is fixing the country’s primary problems. The next president must focus on securing the bigger changes Americans demand, such as a stable job market, access to credit, and a safer global arena, while also attempting to make his administration appear transparent, communicative, and outside the grasp of special interests. It will be a great feat if he can manage it; if he is unable to, it is unlikely the reform agenda will return to the forefront of policy dialogue and political debate.
© 2024 Harvard Political Review. All rights reserved.