Pragmatic Progressivism: Process, Not Ideology

This post is the second of a four-part series leading up to the inauguration.


Since November 4th, that Night Like No Other, Barack Obama has floated in 70th heaven. Over 70% of Americans support our next President and the plans he is making for when he takes office in two days. Although his popularity is extraordinarily high, I don't believe it is just from the sunglasses.

To some people, the approach Obama has taken in managing his transition to office has been confusing. It is a complex method that Obama has applied, which requires us to take a look below the surface. If we can understand how he has operated, we may also get a glimpse into how Obama may govern once in office.

First, there has been crisp, effective organization. Although it has not been as tightly sealed as during the campaign, this organization has run more smoothly and more effectively than any transition in memory.

Second, Obama and his team have collectively bought into a process, not an ideology. That process has been referred to as "pragmatic progressivism," and it has been applied in a variety of areas since election day. The most visible application of this process has been in Obama putting together his "Team of Rivals," his cabinet.
Another area where pragmatic progressivism has been in play has been regarding our struggling economy and the necessary stimulus package. Finally, pragmatic progressivisim was used in determining the religious speakers for the inauguration events, where first Rick Warren was announced as offering the invocation, and only later was Gene Robinson invited to fill a similar role in the inauguration events.

What is pragmatic progressivism? Where did Obama develop a sense of it? How is it used?

When Obama worked as a community organizer on the south side of Chicago, he needed to find ways to build coalitions and move groups of disconnected people forward for the purpose of change. By clearly identifying a problem and the desired outcome, he would then find creative ways to empower those people towards that end.

Pragmatic progressivism, as I've seen it applied with Obama, is not purely an ideology. Many people equate progressive with the term "liberal," from former political generations. Progressive is certainly related to liberal in that it is located left of center on the political spectrum. However, it is not an ideology in that it entails a position of beginning, not a rigid point to hold onto with a refusal of shifting to the right.

"Pragmatic" indicates that a strategy must work in two ways: first, it must actually be implemented -- in government this would usually happen by passing legislation, and second, it must meet the desired goal for change -- it should fix the problem once implemented. When the term "pragmatic" is used simultaneously with "progressivism," we can see that the initial focus is on a left of center objective. But, if that exact point is not obtainable, then it must be calibrated more towards the center through the negotiation process.

Such negotiation involves bipartisan coalition building. Since Richard Nixon's administration, the primary way of operating has been zero sum: we win, you lose. Through the approach of pragmatic progressivism and bipartisanship, there can be a greater outcome -- one of win-win. Not only is there a positive outcome for change, but also a firmer foundation for future bipartisan opportunities. Some may say that this becomes post-partisanship, but in reality it is based on the simple concept of inclusivity.

Ultimately, the goal is to find a way of bringing about change for the good of the people. Often in the past, proponents of change held onto an "all or nothing" ideology. If the opposition would not accept the liberal position, then the conservatives would be blamed for not getting on board. There was one big problem with this: The status quo tended to remain in place, i.e., no change. The result was fingers pointing out the blame in all directions.

Obama's pragmatic progressivism takes a different tact. He starts with his focal point left of center. If he sees that such a goal is obtainable, he will quickly and decisively grasp ahold of it without the need of building a greater coalition. Change is successful without a lot of horse trading with his opponents because the majority fall quickly onto his side. An example of this is with stem cell research, where Obama will not have to exert this change via presidential powers. George W. Bush's order to block federal funding should be quickly overridden by Congressional legislation because there is already a majority who oppose Bush's executive order.

If, on the other hand, Obama wants to pass an $850 billion stimulus package, he needs Republican and Democratic support. Initially, he wanted to include $300 billion of tax cuts -- a right of center move -- to assure Republican support. Democrats, however, expressed their concern over such a shift to the right, so it now looks like the tax cuts may not be included in the plan.

The important part of the process is to see how Obama "calibrates" his approach as he moves forward. He is clearly not stuck on ideology; he wants change that can actually be passed by Congress and implemented.

The criticism of such an approach is that it sometimes appears that, rather than sticking to principles, Obama is licking his finger and sticking it in the wind to get a sense of the most current opinion. It will be interesting to see how this approach plays out over the term of his administration.

Obama will frustrate progressives at times, which is why we must hold him accountable to the promises he made. The temptation for him to slide too far right is great and, in the process, end up with a solution that is found simply for the sake of compromise,"the least common denominator." We The People will need to identify those decisions where we simply swallow hard and accept it and those where we will have to communicate with Obama so clearly that he follows the will of the people who elected him to office.

Keeping Obama accountable will nudge him to take the risk to move things where his heart actually is, left of center. When all is said and done then, the change that millions voted for this fall will actually come to fruition. Instead of following an out-dated way of doing politics, Obama will apply an organic, give-and-take, inclusive process that we will be seeing a lot of in the years to come: pragmatic progressivism.