Star Power, Minor Role

The New York Times article, "Obama in Senate: Star Power, Minor Role," which was published Sunday, examines the accomplishments and activities of the Senator's brief national career. Any article on Obama has to begin by mentioning just how significant his speech was before the Democratic National Convention in the summer of 2004. This was his first real moment to show himself to the country and establish himself as a national figure. John Kerry gave him the opportunity to speak to the country during that evening's primetime TV slot, and he quickly introduced America to his brand of inspirational speech and hope for a better future. He took advantage of this attention to re-release his memoir, which went on to become a best-seller for many weeks to come. He, therefore, arrived at the Senate being as much a "rock star politician" as any freshman Senator could be.

The Times mentions that Obama's celebrity label was not appealing to many other members of Congress, as they appreciated experience and hard work above all else. Senator Obama, it is mentioned, was therefore eager to prove himself during his first year, as he turned down Sunday morning talk show interview requests, tried to join important Senate subcommittees, and focused on the legislation that was presented to him. He appeared eager to learn, which was a sign many Senators did appreciate, as he met with most of his colleagues and sought to be mentored by those like Senator Kennedy, who had a great deal of experience with Washington politics. However, his failure to stand up for his positions on issues of immigration and the war in Iraq angered many fellow Democratic Senators, as they described Obama as being present only "occasionally" during the lengthy Senate debates on immigration and failing to stand by his previously-firm stance that the Iraq war was wrong and should be ended. These are the kinds of "speech over action" examples that the Clinton campaign is now trying to say define his record.

For Obama, his frustration with the limitations of Washington made him eager to change its working environment and, ultimately, inspired him to seek higher office. The article mentions how sluggish everything in the Senate seemed to Senator Obama and how disheartening it was that they did not seem to be producing much significant legislation in his first year in office. The article adds that Obama did not enjoy his place as a young, freshman Senator, as he would only get to ask the last question in hearings and would not be allowed to play a significant role in legislation. Therefore, Obama stayed detached from Washington and its political games, but, partly as a result, his Senate resume is not incredibly impressive. One of his real triumphs came with the issue of ethics reform, which he worked on with Senator Feingold, as he pushed for several lobbyist-restricting changes with conviction and passion. In addition, Hurricane Katrina and the government's poorly planned response was an issue he took on in order to show his commitment to ending poverty, as well as to put himself back in the public spotlight.

Therefore, Senator Obama's Senate career does not show many examples of direct leadership or successful legislation, and his inexperience in Washington and his disheartened attitude toward the state of politics in general may be partially to blame. He is now running for President as a rock star politician, which brings along great attention and fame, but also causes others to question whether he is worth all the hype as a result of his thin resume and record in Congress. Working for him, however, is the fact, as expressed by his supporter, former Senator Tom Daschle, that “for somebody to come in with none of that history is a real advantage.”

It is clear that Senator Obama's celebrity status has catapulted him onto the national stage, but it is his new brand of politics that is attracting so many to his campaign. However, it is also these questions of Obama's inexperience and use of "just words" that is propelling Senator Clinton's recent comeback. Whether, in the end, voters decide that a relatively blank record in Congress is better than a more extensive history (like with Senators Clinton or McCain) is still yet to be determined.