US Politics: Can Obama Use a "New Discourse" To Take Control of the State of the Union?

EA's US Politics Correspondent Lee Haddigan writes:

Last week witnessed a sobering reconsideration of the divisive effect of partisan rhetoric in American politics. Led by President Obama, in his stirring speech at the memorial for the six people who died in the Arizona shootings, politicians in Washington stated their desire to return to civil discourse when debating contentious policy issues.

This is a concern to which the President is expected to return in his State of the Union Address on 25 January, and one that affords him the opportunity to escape the ideological shackles that a partisan media have placed on political debate. 

But this week, before that eagerly awaited speech, the commitment to responsible political dialogue will be tested in the House of Representatives. Last week, out of respect for the victims of the Arizona shootings, the House postponed a vote on repealing health care reform. On Tuesday, however, the Republican-controlled House begins debate on H. Res. 2, the “Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act", and deliver on their campaign promise to "defund then repeal" healthcare.

The repeal bill is expected to pass the House handily, but it will probably be defeated by the Democrat majority in the Senate, and the President is certain to use his veto in the unlikely event that the Senate does approve the bill. What the vote does --- despite Democrat protests that this  is a colossal waste of time and resources --- is place politicians on the record  over the controversial law.

Republicans will use its defeat in the Senate as a weapon against Democrats in the 2012 elections. Conversely, Democrats will target Republicans in the House of Representatives who voted for repeal, focusing on those swing seats that determine who controls the lower house of Congress. As the Democratic National Committee commented on the Saturday morning, hours before the Arizona shootings, the debate is a "bring-it-on moment". 

Few Democrats are now keen to maintain this confrontational approach in the seven-hour debate on Wednesday that will precede the vote on the Act. In his weekly address on Saturday, President Obama reiterated the "bipartisan" passage in his memorial speech, emphasising again his role as leader of the nation and not just the Administration: "I look forward to working together in that same spirit of common cause with members of Congress from both parties – because before we are Democrats or Republicans, we are Americans."

There is no doubt that the President's desire to see a a more bipartisan approach in Washington is genuine. That said, his focus on promoting cooperation and not confrontation in political debate, and that includes not only his recent comments but his efforts as well to help usher through bipartisan compromises at the end of the lame duck session of Congress in December, has proved popular with the American people.

An ABC News/Yahoo! poll, taken before the Tucson tragedy, revealed 77% approval of the bipartisan attitude taken by Congress in repealing the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" restriction on those in military service, passing the START treaty on nuclear weapons, and keeping the Bush-era tax cuts. And, in numbers that have particularly irritated Republicans, a 62-31 majority thought that President Obama was primarily responsible for creating the atmosphere for those successful agreement.

The news from the poll was not all good for the President. There is growing pessimism that the economy is going to recover quickly . But with a State of the Union Address where the President can appeal to the moderate centre of American voters --- the vast majority  if the 77% figure from the poll is accurate --- he will be able to stake some political capital for the rough times ahead.

And President Obama may be assisted in his quest to prevent Congress from being one of the most contentious or obstructionist in history. Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle, led by Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), are calling for politicians of both parties to sit together during the speech. In the past, with Republicans on one side and Democrats on the other,  this has presented --- as Udall noted in a letter to fellow members of Congress --- to “the choreographed standing and clapping of one side of the room, while the other side sits, ...unbecoming of a serious institution.” Udall asserted that it “is important to show the nation that the most powerful deliberative bodies in the world can debate our differences with respect, honor and civility".

As of Friday, no Republican member of the House of Representatives had come out in favour of the proposal. And it is in the House that we may see the first cracks in the effort for a more civil political dialogue. After the Wednesday vote on repealing health care reform, the House will convene on Thursday to consider H. Res. 9. This resolution instructs committees of the House “to report legislation replacing the job-killing health-care law” including measures that would “prohibit taxpayer funding of abortions and provide conscience protections for health care providers".

H. Res. 9 is only scheduled for one hour of discussion, but with the Republican Party under pressure from social conservatives to end the federal funding of abortions allegedly provided in the health care law passed last year, some sharp words may be exchanged. There is unlikely to be a showdown on Thursday, but it will set the stage for the immediate future. Two weeks ago on Fox News Sunday, Rep. Fred Upton (D-Mich.), the new chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, announced that"We're going to take up early I think the Stupak language, 'no funds shall be spent on abortion', as a separate bill early on.” And on January 7, Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.), introduced legislation, the Pence Amendment, which argued: "The time has come to deny any and all federal funding to Planned Parenthood of America. The largest abortion provider in America should not also be the largest recipient of federal funds under Title X (of the Labor-HHS Appropriations Act)."

In an evocative reminder of political dignity, Congress will be not in session on Monday because it is a Federal holiday to commemorate the life of Martin Luther King. On Friday, President Obama signed a proclamation honouring MLK Day and declared: "His bold leadership and prophetic eloquence united people of all backgrounds in a noble quest for freedom.” For some like historian Douglas Brinkley, there is a connection with the response to Arizona: President Obama's speech “ was his most important speech so far, one that history is going to reflect on,” and one that the author claimed showed there “was a bit of Dr. King to him.”

That may be an overstatement, but if President Obama can continue his recent "bold leadership and prophetic eloquence" in the State of the Union Address, he has the opportunity to override the bickering in the House of Representatives, imprinting an indelible impression in the minds of the 77% of Americans who believe that compromise is a worthy objective. No one should be naïve enough to think that politics will not return to the heated debate that marked the last Congress, but on 25 January Obama could don the mantle of representing the "silent majority" of moderates of both parties –-- and Independents --– in the US.