Obama’s one-year report card: B —

By John C. Bersia

As the Obama administration enters its second year, evaluations range from the extremely positive to the exceedingly negative. Looking for a balanced, informed perspective from a veteran presidential-studies specialist, I turned to Georgetown University’s Stephen J. Wayne, the author of “The Road to the White House 2008” and a forthcoming book on President Barack Obama.

What grade does Wayne believe Obama deserves thus far? He disputes the “good, solid B plus” the president gave himself, suggesting a B minus is more appropriate because of how little the administration has to show for its efforts.

On the positive side, according to Wayne, Obama certainly has been taking the appropriate kinds of steps demanded by our economic woes. By so doing, he has forestalled a deeper and longer crisis, and helped us locate the road to recovery.

However, Wayne says, the president has also made some strategic and tactical mistakes that hurt him. First was the inability to turn his electoral coalition into an effective one for governing. Obama and his aides made the incorrect assumption that the organization that worked for the campaign would perform as well for the presidency. But, Wayne explains, the president has not been able to rally supporters the way he brought out voters.

Second, the president — perceiving that the public was tired of partisan bickering — concluded that a bipartisan approach might be effective. It has not been, Wayne contends.

Third, Obama has delegated too much legislative detail to Congress. As one result, Wayne argues, the process of producing the health-care bill has been so tedious and mired in compromises that it looks like the same old politics.

This leaves us with what Wayne calls a “largely rhetorical president who utters the right words while offering a thin menu of accomplishments.” As for why, he points to a degree of naivete on the administration’s part; extraordinarily difficult challenges; the deep ideological divide in Congress (more so than in the country itself); unrealistic expectations by the public; and the fact that we are still in the “Age of Reagan,” with ongoing skepticism and even anger toward government.

And Wayne shares one additional bit of insight: “When you go public, you can control the agenda — but not on a variety of issues. Obama has been out there virtually every day, overexposing himself, and reducing the status and impact of presidential statements.”

How does Wayne think this situation will affect the remainder of Obama’s presidency and his political future? Much will turn on the results of the mid-term election, of course, with the state of the economy as the biggest influence. If economic recovery accelerates, Obama stands to benefit. If not, there will likely be Democratic losses, and the president will be pushed to reduce the size and scope of his proposals on energy, climate change and other matters.

Re-election

Even so, Wayne believes Obama will probably win re-election, if he seeks it, unless the economy dips again. Another factor in Obama’s favor, he adds, is the current absence of a Republican on the horizon capable of igniting the electorate and mounting a successful challenge.

In sum, Wayne suggests there is a gap between what we expected and what we received. Obama created the image of a transformational leader during the campaign. Then, in his first 100 days of office, he generated a great deal of optimism. But, Wayne concludes, because Obama is bogged down in politics as usual, forced to delegate and transact on a one-to-one basis, he is essentially governing as a transactional president.

Although I have yet to finalize my thinking about Obama’s performance, I find much to appreciate in Wayne’s analysis. It is blunt but not overly harsh or unfair.

X Bersia, who won a Pulitzer Prize in editorial writing for the Orlando Sentinel in 2000, is the special assistant to the president for global perspectives at the University of Central Florida. Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune.