Despite all the time and effort the media invest in
covering the State of the Union address each year, it remains remarkably bad theater,
a production whose importance is dwindling along with its audience.
The script:
The President assures his fellow Americans that the
State of the Union has never been better while reciting a list of accomplishments that
he embraces as his own, which in more than a few cases is an exaggeration.
The President will then lay out his vision for the
future, including many initiatives that will go nowhere because his party
doesn’t control either the House or the Senate.
He will then attempt to convince us that America’s
greatness is the direct result of his party’s stewardship. He will view with alarm, point with pride, call to action.
Rinse and repeat every year.
While this is going on, an army of reporters are
tweeting what is being said as fast as their thumbs can dance across their
Blackberry keyboards. (“President declares America good, our enemies bad.”)
Members of the opposition fall all over themselves to
give a response. While there is one official response, everybody can now get
into the act thanks to You Tube.
Within 24 hours, contrarian opinions outnumber cat
pictures on the Internet.
In the meantime, dozens of analysts, like
archaeologists exploring a mysterious ancient tomb, try to make sense of it all.
The highlight, for me at least, is watching to see how
the lack of civility that defines Washington politics is going to rear its ugly
head.
A few years back, Democrats lustily booed President
Bush when he when he
called for renewal of the Patriot Act. The next year they shouted
"No!" when Bush pushed for Social Security reform.
Then there was the time that Republican Joe Wilson in
the midst of the speech shouted “you lie” at President Obama, thereby cementing
his place in the Blockhead Hall of Fame.
And this year, when Republicans derisively cheered
after Obama commented that he had no more campaigns to run, he ad-libbed, “I know,
because I won both of them.” To raucous laughter and applause. For a moment, I thought
I was watching open mike night at a comedy club.
TV viewership for President Obama's State of the Union
address Tuesday night fell to a 15-year low, according to numbers from
Nielsen.
The combined figure is down about 5% from last year's
State of the Union address, which drew about 33.3 million viewers. It was the lowest since
President Clinton's final State of the Union in 2000. That speech pulled in
just under 31.5 million viewers.
To be sure, there have been memorable moments from the
State of the Union Speech. Historians agree on these as worthy of recognition:
--- The address had been a written document submitted to
Congress, rather than a delivered speech. This changed with President Woodrow
Wilson, who chose to deliver his message personally to Congress in 1913.
--- Franklin Roosevelt in 1941 evoked “the Four
Freedoms”—freedom of speech and worship and freedom from want and fear—as a
powerful justification for what was to be America’s role in a world at war.
--- Republican President Gerald Ford in 1975, his first
address since ascending to the presidency in the August of 1974 after Richard
Nixon's resignation, pulled no punches when he declared, “I must say to you
that the state of the Union is not good.”
--- Lyndon Johnson promised in his 1964 address that the
coming Congress would be remembered as the one that “declared all-out war on
human poverty.”
--- James Monroe’s State of the Union address in 1823
outlined a policy which stated that the United States would not meddle in the
affairs of European governments and, most importantly, declared that any
further efforts by European powers to colonize countries in the Western
Hemisphere would be considered an act of aggression requiring U.S.
intervention. It became known at the Monroe Doctrine.
--- In 1862, Abraham Lincoln used his message to Congress
to tie the preservation of the Union and the abolition of slavery.
"Without slavery the rebellion could never have existed; without slavery
it could not continue.”
Alas, the moments when the lofty rhetoric translates
into something meaningful are rare.
So what to do? Should we shut off the cameras,
send the pundits packing and let the proceedings take place in some obscure committee
room?
No. Despite the politics and posturing, the people’s
business should be conducted in public. The most serious threat to democracy
comes from those who would govern in secret and speak only among themselves.
So how do we make the State of the Union address
relevant again?
Why not a modified debate format? The President and
the leader of the loyal opposition are given 15 minutes for an opening
statement, then are questioned by members of the media and the public.
At the end of the day, we would ultimately know a lot
more about the state of the union than we learn from an oratorical press
release conceived and delivered by and for the party in power.
Robert Rector is a veteran of 50 years in print journalism. He has worked at the San Francisco Examiner, Los Angeles Herald Examiner, Valley News, Los Angeles Times and Pasadena Star-News. He can be reached at Nulede@Aol.Com.
Robert Rector is a veteran of 50 years in print journalism. He has worked at the San Francisco Examiner, Los Angeles Herald Examiner, Valley News, Los Angeles Times and Pasadena Star-News. He can be reached at Nulede@Aol.Com.