Carter Consciousness

DURING THE PAST MONTH, Jimmy Carter has been the target of harsh criticism from both the left and the right. The critics generally complain that the president has done either too little or too much; that Carter has reneged on campaign promises or that he has unrealistically tried to keep too many; that he has not restored that elusive chimera called "business confidence" or that he has a misplaced faith in the private sector; that Carter quickly became a Washington "insider" practicing the "old politics," or that he is still politically naive and on dangerously bad terms with Congress because he refuses to "play the game."

In liberal circles the president has been accused of sounding like a Republican, while the conservatives bemoan his misguided brand of populism. Those in the political center are not yet sure where Carter stands and probably make up the dwindling minority who still believe he is doing a good job. My own conclusion is that for anyone to have so many critics from interest groups of every possible political persuasion, he must be doing something very right.

Most presidents have had a fairly clear set of legislative priorities, a few bills they are prepared to beg and bargain through Congress. But while they concentrated on a few items, other, often more crucial problems are totally neglected. Presidents traditionally shy away from very fundamental problems with entrenched interests on either side. Taking tough positions on divisive issues and proposing comprehensive reforms is more of a threat to their ruling coalition and reputation then is creating new programs or going along with incremental reform.

This approach to governing is always disappointing. America still has some very fundamental problems to deal with. It seems obvious that the U.S. will have to bite the energy bullet--yet neither extensive conservation plans nor the development of alternative energy sources was legislated. It seems obvious that our current taxation and welfare systems are an unfair and unholy mess. The social security system has been edging toward bankruptcy for years. The federal bureaucracy has grown so huge and decentralized that it acts as both a quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial fourth branch of the government, yet there has been no real reorganization since the New Deal. The Federal deficit is as intolerable as the unemployment rate, but no one in power has addressed the issue head on.

The naive observer might remark that if these things are really such glaring problems, Congress would have dealt with them long ago. But a look at U.S. foreign policy reveals many of the same serious problems that were with us during the '60s and even before. The U.S. is illegally occupying a canal in Central America. Arms negotiations are used as an excuse to set ridiculously high quotas on expensive nuclear weaponry, with nobody even considering large scale nuclear disarmaments or controls. Our government supports dictatorships around the world and our intelligence agencies employ deplorable tactics to topple others. We ignore the situation in South Africa and Southern Rhodesia and human rights in general.

The issues listed above are probably the most crucial long-term problem facing the United States. To many of us, the problems as well as the available solutions are obvious. It was with this in mind that so many of us got excited when the Southern populist with a heart full of media-manipulated goodwill ran for the presidency. We elected him not because of his experience, but because of our faith and optimism in this possibly trustworthy man.

DESPITE ALL THE CONCERN and criticism the new president has generated, that investment in faith seems justified after a year. While Carter has not "accomplished" a damn thing in terms of problems actually solved, he has in one short year put every single problem listed above on the national agenda. He proposed a balanced and comprehensive energy plan, a consolidated and simplified program to create jobs and raise income, an urban development plan and some tax reforms (though fewer than he wants). We elected a man much like ourselves--perceptive of the problems but politically naive--and so it is a bit early to castigate him because he cannot get his programs through Congress.

Carter's only serious crime, then, is Optimism in the first degree. Despite his lust for Washington's power, he was an outsider in the true sense of the world. Oblivious to elitist protocol and disdainful of pork-barrel politics, he innocently seemed to believe that solving the nation's problems was more important to Congressmen than their re-election worries, debts to special interests and status in the Capital Hill Club. He was wrong. The new breed of young, educated, "professional" Congressmen have gained the appearance of competence (due mostly to their staff's), but they are practically incapable of making the tough choices Carter has been asking them to make.

ALL OF THE ABOVE is not to say that Carter has not made some big "mistakes"--among other things, he increased the defense budget, he was long unresponsive to the needs of the urban poor, particularly blacks, and he has demonstrated a strange sense of loyalty by his actions in the Lance and Marsden affairs. Yet the good has far outweighed the bad. Half-assed answers are not necessarily better than no solution at all. Congressmen and the nation's economic elite their help in solving the biggest problems of the decade. Carter realizes this, and despite his efforts to resist the traditional inertia of national politics, he is getting pressure from all sides to be sensible, compromise and hold hands with the corrupt.

Even if nothing else is "accomplished" this year, Carter has increased the awareness of problems from which there is no escape. He has provided a moral leadership, the benefits of which will far outlast any partial solutions a compromising Congress can legislate. All we can do, then, is hope that his inaugural speech did not mark his surrender to the entrenched interests he outwitted so well in his campaign. Michael A. Calabrese