Who does Barack Obama listen to?
Not Republican politicians. Evidently weeks go by between his conversations with Speaker John Boehner who determines what legislation comes to the House floor.
Not Democratic politicians. We have it on good authority that he seldom talks to Democratic members of Congress. Lyndon Johnson used to be on the phone constantly cajoling and inveigling but also on the alert for shifts in opinion.
Speaker Tip ONeill walked around the Capitol asking member after member What do you hear? In contrast Obama a former adviser told Vanity Fairs Todd Purdum is a total introvert. He doesnt need people.
But there is one group of people Obama has to listen to: the people who give him large sums of money. He recently attended his 150th fundraiser. Thats more than the number attended by the last four presidents put together.
Obama has seen enough Architectural Digest-type interiors in Park Avenue triplexes and Beverly Hills mansions and on the block in San Franciscos Pacific Heights where every house is owned by a billionaire to develop an expertise in Louis XV walnut commodes and Brunschwig & Fils fabrics.
Hes also had plenty of chances to absorb the advice of the kind of rich liberals who like to give money to Democratic presidents. And the evidence that he has taken some of that advice is his initiatives on three controversial issues each of which involves serious political risk.
The first and least risky of these stands is his endorsement of same-sex marriage. Many Democratic money-givers straight as well as gay have strong convictions on this issue and were probably not appeased by his assurance that he was evolving from his opposition to it.
Obamas reversal will likely help him rekindle the enthusiasm that pro-same-sex-marriage young voters once felt for him. And theres some polling evidence suggesting that his new stand has changed the opinion of many previously anti-same-sex marriage black voters.
Still his move probably turned off some older voters and puzzled others who wonder why with a sluggish economy he was spending time on an issue that he said should be handled by the states.
The second issue on which Obama seems to have been listening to his money-givers was the health insurance mandate requiring employers to pay for contraceptives and abortifacients.
Many rich liberals feel strongly that womens reproductive rights (actually the right not to reproduce) are so vital that government must ensure they have free access to contraception even though it is widely available and inexpensive.
Thats one view. Roman Catholic bishops and leaders of Catholic institutions feel that such services are sinful and refuse to provide them. They cite the Constitutions guarantee of free exercise of religion while the other side relies on what courts have called emanations and penumbras radiating from constitutional texts.
The political point is that as polling suggests most Americans dont like government forcing people to violate their religious convictions. Thats in line with tradition in a country that exempted those with religiously based conscientious objections from military service in a war in which more than 400000 Americans were killed.
The third issue is the Keystone XL pipeline which would transport oil produced from tar sands in Canada to United States refineries and create thousands of jobs in the process.
Earlier this year Susie Buell Tompkins John Kerrys fourth-biggest money-raiser in 2004 picketed outside an Obama fundraiser at San Franciscos W Hotel to protest the pipeline. She wanted Obamas State Department to block it because she thinks tar sands production hurts the environment and the planet.
Our neighbors the Canadians who are not unconcerned about the environment themselves disagree. The pipelines promoters say it would produce 20000 American jobs and would tend to lower U.S. gas prices.
Obama came out on Tompkins side and blocked the pipeline.
If the same-sex marriage reversal seems somewhat risky politically and the contraception mandate considerably riskier the Keystone pipeline decision seems downright foolish politically. Voters tend to favor it by two-to-one margins -- and if theyre not aware of it the Republicans (and maybe the pro-pipeline unions) will make sure they are.
When given a chance to draw new boundaries of his state Senate district in 2002 Obama made sure to include Chicagos richest lakefront neighborhood. Hes been working hard to court rich liberal contributors ever since.
The question is is he listening to anyone else?
Michael Barone senior political analyst for The Washington Examiner (www.washingtonexaminer.com) is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute a Fox News Channel contributor and a co-author of The Almanac of American Politics.
Who does Barack Obama listen to?
Not Republican politicians. Evidently weeks go by between his conversations with Speaker John Boehner who determines what legislation comes to the House floor.
Not Democratic politicians. We have it on good authority that he seldom talks to Democratic members of Congress. Lyndon Johnson used to be on the phone constantly cajoling and inveigling but also on the alert for shifts in opinion.
Speaker Tip ONeill walked around the Capitol asking member after member What do you hear? In contrast Obama a former adviser told Vanity Fairs Todd Purdum is a total introvert. He doesnt need people.
But there is one group of people Obama has to listen to: the people who give him large sums of money. He recently attended his 150th fundraiser. Thats more than the number attended by the last four presidents put together.
Obama has seen enough Architectural Digest-type interiors in Park Avenue triplexes and Beverly Hills mansions and on the block in San Franciscos Pacific Heights where every house is owned by a billionaire to develop an expertise in Louis XV walnut commodes and Brunschwig & Fils fabrics.
Hes also had plenty of chances to absorb the advice of the kind of rich liberals who like to give money to Democratic presidents. And the evidence that he has taken some of that advice is his initiatives on three controversial issues each of which involves serious political risk.
The first and least risky of these stands is his endorsement of same-sex marriage. Many Democratic money-givers straight as well as gay have strong convictions on this issue and were probably not appeased by his assurance that he was evolving from his opposition to it.
Obamas reversal will likely help him rekindle the enthusiasm that pro-same-sex-marriage young voters once felt for him. And theres some polling evidence suggesting that his new stand has changed the opinion of many previously anti-same-sex marriage black voters.
Still his move probably turned off some older voters and puzzled others who wonder why with a sluggish economy he was spending time on an issue that he said should be handled by the states.
The second issue on which Obama seems to have been listening to his money-givers was the health insurance mandate requiring employers to pay for contraceptives and abortifacients.
Many rich liberals feel strongly that womens reproductive rights (actually the right not to reproduce) are so vital that government must ensure they have free access to contraception even though it is widely available and inexpensive.
Thats one view. Roman Catholic bishops and leaders of Catholic institutions feel that such services are sinful and refuse to provide them. They cite the Constitutions guarantee of free exercise of religion while the other side relies on what courts have called emanations and penumbras radiating from constitutional texts.
The political point is that as polling suggests most Americans dont like government forcing people to violate their religious convictions. Thats in line with tradition in a country that exempted those with religiously based conscientious objections from military service in a war in which more than 400000 Americans were killed.
The third issue is the Keystone XL pipeline which would transport oil produced from tar sands in Canada to United States refineries and create thousands of jobs in the process.
Earlier this year Susie Buell Tompkins John Kerrys fourth-biggest money-raiser in 2004 picketed outside an Obama fundraiser at San Franciscos W Hotel to protest the pipeline. She wanted Obamas State Department to block it because she thinks tar sands production hurts the environment and the planet.
Our neighbors the Canadians who are not unconcerned about the environment themselves disagree. The pipelines promoters say it would produce 20000 American jobs and would tend to lower U.S. gas prices.
Obama came out on Tompkins side and blocked the pipeline.
If the same-sex marriage reversal seems somewhat risky politically and the contraception mandate considerably riskier the Keystone pipeline decision seems downright foolish politically. Voters tend to favor it by two-to-one margins -- and if theyre not aware of it the Republicans (and maybe the pro-pipeline unions) will make sure they are.
When given a chance to draw new boundaries of his state Senate district in 2002 Obama made sure to include Chicagos richest lakefront neighborhood. Hes been working hard to court rich liberal contributors ever since.
The question is is he listening to anyone else?
Michael Barone senior political analyst for The Washington Examiner (www.washingtonexaminer.com) is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute a Fox News Channel contributor and a co-author of The Almanac of American Politics.
