Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Put the State of the Union address out of its misery
Put the State of the Union address out of its misery
Mar 17, 2025 8:42 PM

It’s time to state the obvious: The State of the Union address is doing more harm than good, making promises it can’t keep and further eroding citizens’ opinion of government. Who’ll be the first brave POTUS to end the SOTU?

Read More…

In the fable of “The Bell and the Cat,” a group of mice discuss how best to protect themselves from a rapacious, predatory cat who has been hunting them down. One mouse suggests they put a bell on the cat so they’ll know when the cat is approaching. All the mice agree this is a good idea. But there isn’t a single mouse who wants to be the one charged with putting the bell on the cat.

It’s in every mouse’s interest to put the bell on the cat, but it’s not in the interest of any individual mouse to be the one actually to do the job.

Similarly, it’s in the interest of the modern American presidency, not to mention the American nation, to end the in-person delivery of the State of the Union. But it’s not clearly in any individual president’s interest to be the one who pulls the plug.

For more than 100 years, the presidential obligation to update Congress on the state of the union came mostly in the form of a letter. But as is true of so many awful things in American political history, it’s President Woodrow Wilson who’s responsible for the current spectacle of the in-person address.

Once upon a time, political soothsayers would speculate about how big a bump in public opinion the president would receive from a successful State of the Union. Presidents have viewed the speech as a way to reframe and reboot their flagging presidencies. Neither of these things have been true for years now.

Today the State of the Union exists mostly as a vehicle for the president of the United States to lie to the American people and set himself up for future failures.

Now, all politicians lie. President George H. W. Bush asked us to read his lips that there would be “no new taxes” before he, in fact, raised taxes. President Barack Obama told us that “if you like your healthcare plan, you can keep your healthcare plan” before millions of Americans saw their healthcare plans canceled after the passage of the Affordable Care Act.

Every president, indeed every politician, tells these kinds of lies. Most of them are the monplace political spin that is part and parcel of politics and may not stand out to us in our collective memory as much as these two famous examples. But the State of the Union now invites a more harmful form of lying that is helping to erode Americans’ faith in our political institutions: lying about what can actually be plished in our system of governance.

Since at least the time of Bill Clinton’s presidency, the State of the Union has included a laundry list of policy priorities, pletely disconnected from political reality. This year, President Biden rattled off ponents of his Build Back Better agenda, rebranded as “building a better America.” Set aside for a moment that it is Congress, not the president, who initiates legislation and that it shouldn’t matter all that much what any given president wants Congress to do. The biggest problem with these lists is that they further a trend of telling the American people that politicians can plish things they simply cannot.

In 2013, Sen. Ted Cruz led a shutdown of the government, promising it would result in President Obama’s approving the defunding of his signature healthcare legislation. That was never going to happen. While campaigning for president, then-Sen. Kamala Harris promised that “on day one” she’d take executive action on gun control that would clearly be illegal. That was never going to happen either.

Politicians keep promising the American people that all their myriad problems can be solved just by voting for them. Then, when those problems linger, the American people toss out those politicians who lied to them in favor of another group making different lies.

The result of this perverse two-step has been a steep decline in Americans’ faith in our own institutions of politics and government. So much so as to render the one line every president delivers in the State of the Union address—“The state of our union is strong”—also a lie.

The American presidency is one of the world’s most exclusive clubs. Only 45 men have served in that role in American history. Only six of those men, including the current president, Joe Biden, are alive at this moment. The group of people who could potentially e president in the near future is larger—and perhaps after the unlikely election of Donald Trump in 2016 even larger than we might think—but it’s still not an enormous group of people.

Yet even a group that small and that exclusive can suffer from a collective action problem. The president who finallydecides to be the one to put the bell on the cat and put the State of the Union out of its misery will have done our nation a great favor.

This article originally appeared in The Detroit News on March 11, 2022

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
How 2016 election turnout data encourages humility
The following graph, in various forms, is making the rounds: [Image removed.] The suggestion of the graph (and usually mentary by those who share it) is that Sec. Hillary Clinton lost to President-elect Donald Trump because Democrats didn’t turn out to vote for her like they did for President Obama. The idea is that Hillary Clinton was a historically unpopular candidate. This is true. Second only to Donald Trump, she was the least liked candidate of all time, at least...
Understanding commodity taxes
Note: This is the tenthpost in a weekly video series on basic microeconomics. In this video Tyler Cowen modity taxes, including who pays the tax and lost gains from trade, also called deadweight loss. He also considers how the tax wedge would apply to the example of Social Security taxes. (If you find the pace of the videos too slow, I’d mend watching them at 1.5 to 2 times the speed. You can adjust the speed at which the video...
Why not socialism?
“In spite of socialism’s sorry track record, millions of well-meaning people think it’s a virtual synonym passion,” says Lawrence Reed. “But socialists themselves are constantly retreating from their own handiwork. It’s socialism until it doesn’t work, then it was never socialism in the first place. It’s socialism until the wrong guys get in charge, then it’s everything but.” Socialism never seems to have any theory of wealth creation, only fanciful schemes for its reallocation after somebody goes to the trouble...
Rev. Robert A. Sirico: Pope Francis and the condemnation of money
The following article is the Acton Institute’s English translation from the Italian “Il Papa e la condanna dei soldi. Parla Padre Robert Sirico” written by Matteo Matzuzzi and published inthe Rome-based daily Il Foglio on November 8. Readers should note that there is no official English translation of Pope Francis’ November 5 address to leaders of lay movements gathering inside the Vatican. The original speech in Italian, Spanish and Portuguese can be found here. “It certainly would be absurd to...
How defending capitalism is like recycling
Each week my neighbors and I engage in a curious ethical ritual. On Wednesday morning before we leave for work we set outside our doors an artifact that expresses our obligation to the welfare of future generations. We call these objects recycling bins. Recycling is one example of an action that we take in the present to benefit a group in the future. The earth has enough space and resources that all current generations could be extremely wasteful without having...
Are Christianity and Communism mutually exclusive?
Did Pope Francis just publicly endorse Communism? ments have prompted many to suggest he has. During an interview with Eugenio Scalfari, they had the following exchange: [Scalfari:] You told me some time ago that the precept, “Love your neighbour as thyself” had to change, given the dark times that we are going through, and e “more than thyself.” So you yearn for a society where equality dominates. This, as you know, is the programme of Marxist socialism and then munism....
Radio Free Acton: Victoria Coates on the art of democracy
In this edition of Radio Free Acton, we speak with cultural historian and author Victoria Coates on the capacity of democracy to inspire great works of art. Coates is the author of David’s Sling: The History of Democracy in Ten Works of Art, and spoke on the topic as part of the 2016 Acton Lecture Series. You can listen to the podcast via the audio player below, and her full Acton Lecture Series presentation is available here. ...
Religion & Liberty: The evidence of things not seen
The final issue of Religion & Liberty for 2016 is now available online. It will explore a breadth and depth of topics, including the “ten dollar founding father,” why we need those dollars, the danger of a utopian dream and more. For the main feature, Victor Claar interviews Vernon Smith, who won the Nobel Prize for economics in 2002. He describes the relationships among many things we might not think are connected, especially the interplay between economics, science and religion....
Edmund Burke on economic freedom and the path to flourishing
Advocates of economic freedom have a peculiar habit of only promotingthe merits of the free markets as they relate to innovation, poverty alleviation, and economic transformation. In response, critics are quick to lament a range of “disruptive” side effects, whether on munities or human well-being. Alas, in over-elevating the fruits of material welfare, we forget that suchfreedom is just as important as a restraint against the social dangers of an intrusive state as it is an accelerantto economic progress. If...
Gaining the world, keeping your soul
Recently, RossDouthat gave a talk at St. Michael’s College at the University of Toronto on the question, “Can You Be a Harvard Catholic?” The Harvard grad and New York Times columnist said he has always found religion to be a personal and professional asset to his career, not a hindrance. He mused that this may be particularly the case because of his distinctive path as a journalist. “Weirdness is good,” he said. “It connects you to the mass of human...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved