In the past I lamented the fact that Presidential "State of the Union" addresses to Congress have in modern history increasingly turned into laundry lists of projects and programs, rather than what might be a more inspiring presentation focused on themes and problems.
Yesterday's address by President Obama, his fifth, was not exactly an exception to this modern rule. We would know this, even if we hadn't listened to or read the speech, thanks to media pundits who have mostly taken the view that this was a "weak" SotU because the proposals put forth - according to them - are incremental, small steps rather than grand programs. They may be correct, but perhaps Obama has just learned from bitter experience, and in any case, analysts ought to recognize that it would be very unusual for any President to propose major new programs in his second term.
There is also an irony here because I suspect it has been largely media pressures that have, over the years, driven the State of the Union address into laundry list territory. Specific proposals are easier for journalists to analyze (and count, and list, and put into tables and charts).
Back to the address: The Washington Post editorial today did a good job of pointing out several of the specific program proposals that seem ripe for bipartisan legislative effort if the Republican Party is prepared to embrace bipartisan efforts on behalf of the nation. I need say no more.
Beyond the laundry list, though, Obama did rise to the occasion with a few useful broader points about our country and our contemporary politics -- broken Washington, for example, and the need to modernize our immigration law.
But the thing that most struck me was one phrase: "permanent war footing." Yes! Those who see only timid half-steps should take a close look at this one. The country has been on a permanent war footing for at least two decades, and a semi-permanent one for at least three decades before that. Time indeed, for us to get back to making war the exception rather than the rule. It's not just to save servicepeople's lives and limbs. That's an important factor but more critical still is that all these wars, most of them wars of choice, have drained us economically and prevented us from dealing adequately with the real needs of a nation at peace: jobs, safety net, economic well-being. Here's one bold, sweeping proposal: Will we get around to declaring war on incessant war? Or is 2014 the new 1984?