December 27, 2012--"Lincoln" & Obama

Steven Spielberg made Lincoln in part to influence current political discourse.

In fact, one day last week the U.S. Senate adjoined early so everyone could go to a private screening and then engage in a discussion with Spielberg and Daniel Day-Lewis, Spielberg's Lincoln. Talk about art imitating, or maybe influencing life.

Not only did Spielberg's Lincoln (and the historical Lincoln) form a cabinet made up of rivals who contested with him for the presidency in 1860--Seward who became Secretary of State; Chase, Treasury Secretary; and Bates who became Lincoln's Attorney General (like what Obama did by selecting Hillary Clinton to be his Secretary of State)--but Spielberg's Lincoln, also like Obama, to pass the 13th Amendment (the film's central narrative element), needed to work in a bipartisan way.

And also like Obama, the opposition hated Limcoln viscerally (saw him to be a crypto-tyrant as some of Obama's extreme haters see him to be the Antichrist); but unlike Obama, Lincoln's version of bipartisanship was not negotiated or carried out through the spirit of compromise, but forced by blunt offers of patronage jobs and the exchange of cash.

In the election of 1864 a raft of members of the House of Representatives, especially Democrats, lost their seats. However, during the rump session of the 38th Congress, during January 1865, those who were defeated were still members and could vote on legislation, including the 13th Amendment which, if passed, would end indentured servitude and, the rub, slavery.

These defeated congressmen for the most part were not wealthy and needed jobs come March when they would no longer be in office; and Lincoln and his men could offer to exchange jobs for votes, which they effectively proved able to do. Postmasters were named as were customs collectors and harbor masters. All to secure Democratic votes for the amendment.

This is where the historical parallels break down. In spite of Spielberg's hope that Obama might watch the film and then decide to pull up his socks and be more like Lincoln, as difficult as congressional relations were for Lincoln, they are much worse now.

Obama as president may be the most powerful man in the world as commandeer in chief of our armed forces, but when it comes to dealing with Congress--especially if he wanted to try to twist arms, threaten, and bribe--he doesn't even have the power of one vote.

If a representative retires or in the rare case is defeated for reelection, rather than needing a patronage job he moves over to K Street and signs up, for big money, to be a lobbyist.

Because of gerrymandering, almost all House members are in safe districts, where, when they are inexorably reelected, they receive 60 to 80 percent of the vote. So it is hard to put pressure on sitting members since their jobs are more secure than the president's.

And then we effectively did away with earmarks and as a result congressmen can't be "bribed" with the offer a new dam or federal office building in their districts.

So, in all, if Lincoln today was trying to get an amendment passed and, as the Constitution requires, needed a two-thrids majority, he would have no cards to play and no postmasterships to pass around.  Thus, the current mess.