"Name One Accomplishment": Barrack Obama, Politics and the U.S. Senate

In acts of increasing desperation, opponents of Barrack Obama are asking over and over, "Where's the Beef?", a reference to their belief the Barrack Obama lacks the requisite experience to serve as President. The question is asked over and over again… “Name one accomplishment of Barrack Obama?” Senator Hillary Clinton, once the annointed heir to the Bush/Clinton line of Presidential succession, has been hammering on this point since her loss in Wisconsin capped her streak of losing 10 primaries in a row since Super Tuesday. And septuagenarian Senator John McCain and his party of grumpy old men also got into the act, calling Obama's campaign theme of hope and change "empty".

Do they REALLY want to go there??!!! To ask the question is one thing; to get an answer that neatly supports the stance of the Clinton and McCain campaigns without blowing back on them is another. The fact is, the Senate is NOT simply a body of passing laws – that role belongs to the House of Representatives. The Senate – with its unique rules and customs and significant media attention – is a deliberative body that provides its membership a very public platform. According to the U.S. Senate’s description of its processes:

“… the Senate remains the preeminent legislative forum for protecting political minorities and debating and refining the great issues of the day.”

So in this context, the issue of accomplishments should be viewed in another light. In October 2006, blogger Hilzoy on Obsidian Wings provides some evidence to this point:

“But I do follow legislation, at least on some issues, and I have been surprised by how often Senator Obama turns up, sponsoring or co-sponsoring really good legislation on some topic that isn't wildly sexy, but does matter. His bills tend to have the following features: they are good and thoughtful bills that try to solve real problems; they are in general not terribly flashy; and they tend to focus on achieving solutions acceptable to all concerned, not by compromising on principle, but by genuinely trying to craft a solution that everyone can get behind.”

He goes on to note that Sen. Obama was very active on issues such as Nonproliferation, the Avian Flu epidemic, regulation of genetic testing, reducing medical malpractice lawsuits (the right way), to name a few. Hilzoy also has identified at least one piece of Obama legislation co-authored with Hilary Clinton. Additionally, Obama's first law passed while in the U.S. Senate was co-authored by Republican Tom Coburn to increase accountability the American people regarding how our tax dollars are spent.

Only part of a Senator’s job is to pass legislation; its also largely a job of shaping and influencing public and policy debate on issues that should be important to the American people, to lead on important issues and get the country – and the President and the House of Representatives – to act. Senators have a significant amount of individual influence, and Senator Obama has assumed a prominent role in leading public debate since his election in 2004.

BTW, Senator Clinton's campaign has nerve brining up the question of accomplishments and experience. Last time I checked, the First Lady did not propose, pass or sign a single piece of legislation; as a Senator, she has done an excellent job working on behalf of her constituencies, but no better (or worse) than Obama during a similar stretch of her legislative career. Clinton has been in the Senate since 2000; this is her first elected post, while Obama worked as a state representative in one of the largest, most complex states in the Union (excluding California, of course!!!). My point is simple: Senator Clinton, you are experienced, but so is Senator Obama. You BOTH have meritorious service of which any Democrat can be proud. But this dog don't hunt... to say that Senator Obama does not have the experience to be commander and chief is disingenuous. In fact, I remember a Governor from the small state of Arkansas that did not have comparatively more experience than Obama does now - your own husband and former President, Bill Clinton. So looking back, would you not support your husband to be President, using the same criteria? Are you saying that you'd be more qualified than your husband to serve as President?

As for McCain, he has a significant number of military and legislative accomplishments, but he is still trying to convince his own party that he belongs among them. He is reaching for the mantle of "Conservative Republican", but Republicans hate McCain’s solution to campaign finance reform; they hate his stance on immigration; they even hated his stance on the war. If the Republicans don’t even trust him, how is he going to become president?

__________________________________________

There are Republicans who hate McCain. But Republicans as a whole don’t hate him. Otherwise he would not be winning the nomination so handily. The truth of the matter is that he is not as conservative as many of us would like him to be. But in the end, you can convict him of being a Republican (minus a few leftward lurches I like to call “Policy Terret's Syndrome”.)

As for what Obama has accomplished over most of his career; the answer is not much. But then again, one doesn’t expect a legislator from the minority party to be able to do much. The question is, what has he accomplished in the last two years since they took the majority?

But I do agree with you that Senator Clinton’s record isn’t much more substantive.

UPDATE 3-07-08: I found this video on youtube. It pretty much says it all... not so much about Obama's accomplishments, but about his supporters.