Change Into Work Clothes

Change. Change. Change. The mantra became so commonplace during this election season that it's hypnotic resonance almost blurs any meaning the term may once have possessed. Yet, the repeated syllable stands for something--something which has become increasingly important to disillusioned citizens of this country. Now that Bill Clinton has been elected president, he must never forget America's message of frustration if he wishes to succeed in office.

Disgruntled Americans simply want their political leaders to care about them, to work on their behalf, and to use the power and tax revenue entrusted to them to make an attempt to improve the country and the lives of all Americans. Ross Perot sensed this mood when he said: "I'm Ross and you're the boss." And the Clinton campaign crystallized the sentiment early on in their slogan "Putting people first."

People became disenchanted with a President who instructed Americans to read his lips and who clearly found it difficult to express his concern for the American people. For example, while campaigning in the New Hampshire primary, Bush accidentally read verbatim from a cue card prepared by his aides--telling one citizen "Message: I care". Voters have shown that a mere continuation of "gridlock" and the "Washington mess" will simply not be tolerated.

Americans want action, not political rhetoric. This mentality explains the attraction many felt toward Perot. Americans want their President to put aside political posturing and get down to business. Someone needs to get working under the hood and start fixing the multitude of national problems. Although Americans ultimately felt that Clinton would be a more competent mechanic than the politically inexperienced Perot, the support that the two shared highlights America's desire for change.

It was clear all year that the electorate demanded change. At the beginning of the campaign, Americans seriously flirted with extremists such as Patrick "Holy Warrior" Buchanan and Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown, an indication of the electorate's intense desire to alter the status quo. By the end of the election season, dissatisfaction culminated with Bill Clinton capturing more than twice as many Electoral College votes as the incumbent president. Even Ross Perot received extraordinarily strong support as a third party candidate, winning almost one in every five votes cast.

Clinton has received an overwhelming mandate for change, but not necessarily for any specific policies. It seems then, that the new president should have a relatively easy time being successful. Clinton should be able to make almost any changes he desires so long as he appears to be working diligently on behalf of the American people. And the Democratic Congress will support most of his initiatives--many of which they have already endorsed.

The major question now is not whether Americans will appreciate Clinton's specific changes, but rather whether change under a Clinton administration can occur swiftly enough to soothe the discontented American electorate. People will care less about the specific benefit they receive than the mere fact that they are being offered something new and different. Clinton will shower social and fiscal policy changes upon the American people, and if he begins the process immediately upon entering office, and continues to do so consistently, his presidency will be deemed a success.

In the first 100 days of the new administration, certain pieces of Clinton's social agenda should be implemented by executive order--beginning the fulfillment of promises pledged during the campaign. He should single-handedly repeal the gag-rule which restricts abortion counseling in federally-funded clinics. He should legalize the importation of the controversial French abortion pill, RU-486. He should repeal the ban that prevents homosexuals from serving in the military. These changes would be quick and would symbolize an engaged leader, eager to improve opportunities for Americans.

As President-elect Clinton knows, however, the economy is undeniably the crucial issue to most Americans. To produce real fiscal change, Clinton's policies will need a considerable amount of time before they bear concrete results. Nonetheless, Clinton, who says he will "focus like a laser beam on this economy," has proposed some immediate changes that he plans to enact quickly in order to jumpstart the economy and bring it out of the current recession.

This package includes increased spending along with certain tax increases and other tax reductions. Central to the plan will be the commitment of $20 billion per year in new spending toward the improvement of infrastructure. Also, an investment tax credit on new plants and machinery will be implemented, as will a reduction in the capital gains tax.

These measures will be financed by cuts in military spending and increases in certain taxes, such as that levied upon the income of Americans earning over $200,000 per year. This economic package theoretically would stimulate the economy by creating jobs, while not enlarging the federal deficit.

The reality of a Democratic Congress almost ensures instantaneous passage of these Presidential proposals. In addition, during the next few years, Clinton will work with Congress to successfully pass legislation to reform health care, education, welfare, job training, energy efficiency, family leave, campaign financing and a number of other issues.

Of course, the effects of such policies will not be immediately felt. The time that will elapse from the original proposal of such legislation to its enactment by Congress is hard to predict. And how long it takes for such policy changes to actually touch the lives of millions of Americans is difficult to know in advance.

However, the effectiveness of such a legislative agenda will be secondary to the passage of the legislation itself. And, most importantly, with a long list of enacted legislation, President Clinton will have proven to the American people that he is working around the clock to improve this country and individual Americans' lives.

Many political observers expect the Clinton administration to resemble that of the young, charismatic John F. Kennedy '40. However, despite his many progressive proposals, Kennedy did not consistently follow through with decisive action. Instead, Clinton should aspire to be more like another Harvard graduate, the action-oriented Franklin D. Roosevelt '04.

Perhaps to the dismay of the exhausted robo-candidate, I sense the imminent emergence of a new, unavoidable mantra.

Work, Bill, work.