State of the Union..A Peace Offering?

President Obama's State of the Union address was arguably one of the most anticipated considering the outcome of the recent MA Senate election which consequently resulted in the Democrats no longer holding the majority in the Senate. I believe it is fair to say that there was a lot on the line during that speech...perhaps an obvious claim. Prior to the Republican Scott Brown victory, Democrats held the majority in the Senate and were aggressively pursuing health care reform the way the Democrats wanted it (dare I say "bullying" because they were the majority party) leaving out elements of reform championed by Republicans such as limiting medical malpractice awards. All that has changed following the Scott Brown election which was wildly evident during last night's State of the Union address.

I am confident in saying that many Americans, myself included, were watching the clock to see how long it would take until Obama spoke about healthcare. I believe that he spent the first 35 minutes of his speech, and strategically so, reinforcing his credibility as having done what he said he would do (including stabilizing the market) and trying to establish a shared identity between Republic and Democrat agendas. This shared identity between the parties was bridged by looking at the interests of the parties and not the positions... speaking about tax reforms that were popular among both parties (tax cuts for home buyers and small businesses as well as no increase in income tax-- i.e. keeping the money in the coveted wallets of Republicans but also helping the middle class) and having carried out the bank bailout rooted in the Bush administration, successfully and with minimal damage (i.e. helping big business without dumping all of that money into a bottomless bucket, as most of the money from the bailout has been recovered.)

When Obama finally addressed the 'elephant in the room' (being healthcare for those that don't understand the analogy) people were at the edge of their seats waiting to hear what he had to say (good or bad.) Instead of continuing to 'bet the ranch' on the Democratic health reform that he so strongly advocated during his first year in office, he clearly distanced himself from the particular legislation. His discussion about healthcare reform seemed to be a desperate cry for help, giving no specific guidance on how to move forward, but pleading Congress not to abandon the issue. Perhaps for the first time, and this is absolutely my opinion, and I genuinely welcome a rebuttal, the President was sincerely soliciting the ideas of the opposition (now he had to mean it because the Republican vote is more important now.) In evidently ignoring reform issues advocated by Republicans, the President took this opportunity to publicly extend the olive branch to Republicans. This olive branch extended much further than health care reform, as he reached out to Republicans to consider measures on tax cuts and fiscals restraint, inviting the parties to work together in a principled way, and demanding increasing accountability on education and other reform issues.

This was a very different President that we have seen before, appealing to parties to get things accomplished, blaming both parties and championing both parties. I am eager to see how Republicans respond now that the ball is in their court, so to speak. The move has been made by the Democrats...will Republicans take the bait?

ev