The lovely Calvin scored me an extra ticket to the Obama break-out session. I saw Clinton before the forum, and she was pretty good — she talked about education policy quite a bit, which was great, and she reiterated her opposition to Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. I should have live-blogged it, but I was distracted by meeting the fabulous Ms. Lauren for the first time, so I didn’t. Although I will also say that Peter Daou got much-deserved applause.
Obama just took the podium — the audience gave him a standing rendition of Happy Birthday. Aww.
He says that bloggers represent a new way of doing politics, where it’s not just one way. He says it’s not just going to be enough to change parties — we need to change how politics and business is done in Washington. Obama talks a little bit about the kinds of changes he wants to make, and then opens it up to questions.
Question: At the Citadel debate two weeks ago, Gov. Richardson and Sen. Biden said they would vote to scrap No Child Left Behind. Obama’s committee will take it up on the Senate re-authorization committee this year. What will he do about No Child Left Behind?
Obama says that he will not vote to re-authorize it unless there are some significant changes. All of us believe in accountability in theory, but we need to take a good look at how we assess progress. No one is taking into account where students are taking off. Teachers are teaching to the test. We need to measure the trajectory of progress, not just draw a line. Unless we have talked with educators about how we are measuring student achievement, he doesn’t want to continue to see a yearly progress report that punishes schools that need more help from the federal government, not less.
Question: Are you going to vote to expand NAFTA to include Panama and Colombia and other nations?
Obama says he doesn’t want to completely pre-judge the situation, but his general principles are that he thinks the biggest challenge we face domestically in passing on an economy that is good for our children and our grandchildren is figuring out what we do about globalization. The burdens and benefits of globalization are not being spread evenly throughout the economy and across the world. If growth is only in Manhattan and the Silicon Valley but not in the Heartland, that’s a problem. Trade is an important component of that. We need to look at it through the lens of the American worker, not just corporations. Trade agreements must have strong and enforceable labor and environmental regulations. He mentions child labor laws specifically. He is not comfortable with a bill that doesn’t have those strong regulations. We need to look at more than what’s good for Wall Street and corporate progress.
Question from Thuston of Laughing Liberally about energy policy. He asks if Obama will clarify his view on coal, and his position on a renewable standard of at least 20 percent.
Obama says that he supports the most aggressive approach in terms of fuel efficiency standards, and that he supports the 20 percent — and that if it’s not on his website, “my bad.” But he thinks that coal is not going to go away overnight. We have too many power plants that are coal reliant, and coal is our must abundant and cheapest energy resource, although our most polluting. He is not anti-coal. He does care about the workers whose jobs are reliant on the coal industry. They need to have a transition. He also cares about the cost of electricity, which matters to seniors on fixed incomes. If we’re worried about climate change, we need to do something about China and about India. We are wealthier than they are, and we need to invest in research. We need to export that technology to China and India, and if we can make it cheaper to do that, it’ll be effective in solving the over-all problem with global warning.
Question: As President, you’re likely to face significant opposition from Republicans who will do anything to make you look bad. Do you have a Lyndon Johnson strategy which will help you get things done despite your populism?
Obama: “Well, first of all, welcome to Chicago.”
Everyone laughs and applauds. He says that when he first got here, he didn’t know a single soul — now he’s a U.S. Senator running for President. “I’m skinny but I’m tough.” Over the last two weeks, he’s had the Washington foreign policy establishment accusing him of being too inexperienced because he suggested that we might want to try talking to our enemies as well as our friends. “Now to go to the Republicans.” More laugh.
“I’ve actually been flattered by how often Mitt Romney tries to lob things at me, not very effectively.” His ideal is that “When someone attacks you, you hit back swiftly, you hit back decisively, and you hit back truthfully.” The Big Lie strategy is that if you repeat something enough, it becomes true — “the same thing applies to truth.”
Question about executive power: What would you do as President to reduce some of that power so that we have three co-equal branches of government again?
Sen. Obama says he is confident that everyone on the earlier stage is committed to making some improvements. But one of his first jobs in addition to gathering the joint chiefs of staff and setting a clear mission for them in removing our troops, is to call in his Attorney General and say that he wants a thorough review of every single executive action that this president has taken. Most of the egregious stuff that’s been going on has happened outside of Congress — they come back later and ask for a ratification. “What happened last night in Congress was a sorry example.” Guantanamo, habeas corpus, and a whole host of those actions were taken by executive demand. As the executive, he would reverse that. A thorough audit of the PATRIOT ACT to see what’s worked and what hasn’t, and what’s valid and what’s not. Part of the test is making sure that we have a justice department and an attorney general who follow the law.
He further discusses his ethics bill that would put on the record any meetings with lobbyists and corporations.
Question: A man from Young People For asks about what policies Obama would have regarding the NSF and new biotechnology — how will this medical technology be available to all Americans.
Obama: “Here’s the starting point — I believe in science. I believe in evidence and facts as opposed to ideology. That’s a good starting point in thinking about what our science policy should be.” That gets a lot of laughs. He would dramatically increase funding for NSF and NIH. NSF and NIH will be independent, and will be reviewed by peers in the fields of which funding is taking place. There will be no requirements from the White House, and no blotter that scratches out things that disagree with its policies. He will also invest in K-12 math and science education, with a particular emphasis on black and brown kids.
Amber a resident of New Orleans currently displaced in the Bay Area, brings up the fact that it took almost 90 minutes for any of the candidates to actually mention “Katrina.” Are there any plans within his campaign to put together a Marshall-like plan to employ those who are still currently unemployed?
Obama says yes. Number one, someone in the White House who is reporting directly to him will tell him what’s being done in terms of progress — they will meet once a week and he will be directly overseeing it. The general issue of who is getting hired for reconstruction is critical. This is a huge lost opoprtunity. If we are smart, we understand that rebuilding New Orleans also offers the prospect of employing and training a whole generation of New Orleans natives who had been neglected and abandoned before the hurricane struck. We should be setting up training and apprenticeship prorams along with unions in that union. The reason we aren’t doing it is because Haliburton and BankTel and other major donors with big-time lobbyists in Washingon are getting the big rebuilding contracts. This is where politics does matter. If we had a cleaner politics in Washington, this reconstruction would ahve happened faster, and it would have benefited the people who actually need it.
Question from Adam, a small business owner. Trying to get health insurance for his employees proved next to impossible. Trying to get his own insurance was very expensive. So his questions are, have you seen Sicko, and what are you going to do with the health insurance companies who are running wild?
Obama has not seen Sicko. The only movie he’s seen in the past six months is Shrek 3. He’s trying to get a DVD sent — he thinks Michael will slip him one, and of course he’ll pay for it. He put forward a detailed health care plan that we can see on his website. Wants to set up a plan similar to what he has as a member of Congress. It will set strict rules for the insurance companies that want to participate — they have to take everyone regardless of pre-existing conditions. Insurance companies cannot spend more money rejecting claims than they do paying out claims. There will be a strict audit system. They will subsidize those peopel who cannt afford to buy into the low-rate group system. He will also roll back the Bush tax cuts. We could get 100 to 125 to 150 billion dollars in saving out of the current system. He recognizes the sympathy for the single-payer system, and if he was designing a system from scratch, that’s what he’d do. But the fact is that we have a whole legacy of institutions, and this is a $2 trillion part of our economy. Policially and economically, it’s better for us to get a universal health care system signed into law by his first term, and then build off that system to be more rational. Then people will have more of a choice. But we have to overcome the institutional resistance in Washington, and that is going to require some strength.
He just called Mike Gravel “cranky.” But Gravel is right when he says that most elected officials have an eye towards what’s going to get them reelected.
Reporters give him a hard time for talking about hope — “I’m a hope-monger, I’m a hope-peddler.” But “If you get too cynical, that’s just as disempowering as being gullible.” The levers of power can be worked in a way that helps the American people. Any one of the other Dem candidates would be better than George Bush. But who’s going to have the capacity to bring the country together and build a working majority around change?
“We aren’t just going to win an election, but we’re going to transform a country in the process.”
That gets him a standing ovation, and with that, it’s over.