Standing at the foot of Mount Rushmore, as I did recently, looking up at the images of four of our greatest presidents carved into a South Dakota mountain, it is hard not to think about national leadership.
My viewing of this monumental tribute to leadership came at a time when the nation was experiencing an especially disgraceful debt ceiling episode in Washington, a time when leadership was sadly lacking.
Public dissatisfaction with Congress is at an all-time high and President Barack Obama has seen his approval rating plummet precipitously.
The president demonstrated a willingness to negotiate and compromise to try to find a solution in the budget-deficit cliffhanger. However, adamant opponents, implored by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor to “look at a potential increase in the debt limit as a leverage moment,” were not interested in compromise and were determined to use that leverage to threaten or even force a default.
Although an agreement of sorts was managed at the last minute, in the process there was considerable damage not just to official Washington, but to the American public and to the nation’s role in the world, and it resulted in adowngrade in the U.S. credit rating and turmoil in the financial markets.
In the aftermath of that debacle, we’ve seen lots of recrimination, intensified by the preliminary stages of the 2012 presidential race.
Leadership can often be a matter of style and image and of rising to the occasion. Obama is seen by many as somewhat subdued and unable to control the narrative and generate confidence.
And we’ve heard suggestions that Obama needs to draw inspiration from some of his predecessors, including those enshrined on Mount Rushmore.
Such inspiration might come from presidents of more recent vintage than the Rushmore foursome (Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt). In Rapid City, S.D., not far from Rushmore, there are statues of every past president on downtown corners. One of those statues is of Harry Truman famouslyholding up a copy of the Chicago Tribune with the headline, “Dewey Defeats Truman.” The premature headline assumed Truman would not defy the odds and defeat Thomas Dewey, but he did, having run a vigorous 1948 campaign centered on his criticism of a “donothing Congress.” Truman was confronted with a weak economy and a polarized Congress, but the feisty Missourian overcame all that, convincing the public he was a strong, in-charge leader.
This week Obama was on a listening tour in the Midwest and although listening is important,action is imperative. And with echoes of that 1948 Truman campaign, Obama encouraged audiences at town-hall meetings to rise up against “congressional inaction.”
Obama might also look at another of his Democratic predecessors. By most accounts, John F. Kennedy got off to a rocky start as chief executive even though he remained relatively popular. It is especially appropriate to review JFK’s first year in office because it came exactly 50 years ago. It is also analyzed extensively in a recent book, “Berlin 1961” by Frederick Kempe. The book focuseson the Cold War showdown over Berlin but deals more broadly with Kennedy’s travails, beginning with the ill-advised Bay of Pigs fiasco and a “humiliating” summit with Nikita Khrushchev leading up to the construction of the Berlin Wall in August 1961. Kennedy was perceived by the Soviets and is portrayed by Kempe as weak and floundering.
However, Kennedy gradually asserted himself and U.S.
power, including his tougher stand on Berlin, exemplified by his 1962 speech there, and most notably in the Cuban Missile Crisis later that year.
While Kennedy’s leadership in those laterevents is certainly instructive on how presidents can turn things around, his role in foreign policy also points to a current question. Can America still lead? Not only do we have a vacuum in national leadership, there is a lack of confidence internationally in the United States, with the recent budget-deficit gridlock contributing mightily to declining global respect.
The weeks ahead will bring more challenges and opportunities for Obama and Congress and a need for leadership that will overcome obstructionism, help get our financial house in order, champion a jobgrowth agenda and bolster our economic standing in the world. The congressional joint “supercommittee” is supposed to report by Nov. 23 and could provide the impetus for major economic progress - if we have constructive and determined leadership.
Those faces on Mount Rushmore and the Truman and Kennedy experiences offer historic examples of leaders rising to challenges.
We will see if Obama and others on the current political and legislative scene can set their own historic examples.
HOYT PURVIS IS A JOURNALISM AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS PROFESSOR.
Opinion, Pages 13 on 08/21/2011