Change What?

Back in the primary, pundits and critics wondered how Obama could deliver change while keeping his promise of bipartisanship, for the Republicans would surely block progressive initiatives. As Obama selects experienced insiders for his administration, pundits and critics now wonder how he can deliver change with a staff whose ideas have shaped past administrative policies. Some assume that Obama will not try or will not be able to fulfill his promises of change. Others assume that to Obama, "change" is an empty word, useful for getting elected but irrelevant to his governing plans.

These apparent inconsistencies only appear to be paradoxical if "change" is taken to mean policy change. But the only dramatic policy changes that Obama promoted during his campaign were Iraq withdrawal, rollback of the Bush tax cuts, healthcare policy, energy policy, and foreign policy. While these proposals would certainly represent a change from the Bush administration's practices, they hardly constitute a wholesale change in the way Washington does business. Obama's policies and priorities will most likely resemble Clinton's with some variations and corrections.

So where is the change? When Obama spoke of change during the campaign, he rarely referred to radical progressive policy changes. Rather, as was apparent in his original Blueprint for Change, he repeatedly promised two changes from "politics as usual":

1. Bipartisan unity
2. Good government practices, particularly government transparency

If we understand "change" in that context, then Obama's plans really do differ from the past two administrations, both of which were characterized by opaque, top-down decision-making and fierce partisan battles. Moreover, such changes are not only consistent with good bipartisan relations and experienced counsel; they depend on them.

As Obama fills out his administration, it has taken a familiar form. The Obama administration looks very much like the Obama campaign: practical, non-ideological, and competent. Like a well-designed engine, it is meant to be smooth, quiet, efficient, and effective. Meticulous vetting procedures and full disclosure of conflicts of interest will help avoid the controversies and cover-ups that dogged the Clinton administration. An emphasis on competence over loyalty and ideology will help avoid the Iraq-Katrina-Medicare bungles of the Bush administration.

In short, Obama intends to run technocracy, a government characterized not by ideology, partisanship, or politics, but by practical effectiveness, a government that the American people, both red and blue alike, can believe in. And that would most certainly be a change.

Whether he'll be able to deliver such change remains to be seen, but he's off to a good start.