This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/18/us/politics/cuba-action-is-obamas-latest-step-away-from-a-cautious-approach.html

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Cuba Action Is Obama’s Latest Step Away From 6 Years of Caution For Obama, More Audacity and Fulfillment of Languishing Promises
(about 4 hours later)
WASHINGTON — President Obama’s decision on Wednesday to radically shift United States policy toward Cuba is the latest and most striking example of a president unleashed from the hesitancy that characterized much of his first six years in office. It follows decisions by Mr. Obama to defy Republicans on immigration, climate change policy, the regulation of the Internet and negotiations with Iran. WASHINGTON — President Obama’s decision on Wednesday to radically shift United States policy toward Cuba is the latest and most striking example of a president unleashed from the hesitancy that characterized much of his first six years in office.
Gone are the cautious political calculations that consigned contentious issues to secondary status. Mr. Obama is instead pushing aggressively on his promises and ignoring his opponents in the process. The announcement, made in a speech to the nation from the Cabinet Room of the White House, follows similar decisions by Mr. Obama in recent weeks to defy Republicans on immigration, climate change policy, the regulation of the Internet and negotiations with Iran.
“He’s going down a checklist of thorny, longstanding problems, and he’s doing whatever he can to tackle them,” said David Axelrod, a former senior adviser. “These are things that have been tearing at us for decades and generations. My sense is his feeling is, I’m not going to leave office without doing everything I can to stop them.” Gone are the cautious political calculations that consigned contentious issues to secondary status and led some of the president’s strongest allies to accuse him of abandoning his principles. Mr. Obama is now pushing forward aggressively on his promised agenda and ignoring his most ardent critics.
As a candidate in 2008, Mr. Obama was scorned by his Republican opponent, Senator John McCain of Arizona, for his pledge to meet with Raúl Castro, the president of Cuba, “at a time and place of my choosing.” Mr. Obama said at the time that if Cuba took steps toward democracy and released all political prisoners “we will take steps to begin normalizing relations.” “He’s going down a checklist of thorny, longstanding problems, and he’s doing whatever he can to tackle them,” said David Axelrod, a former senior adviser. “These are things that have been tearing at us for decades and generations. My sense is his feeling is, ‘I’m not going to leave office without doing everything I can to stop them.’ ”
For six years, Mr. Obama made little progress on an issue fraught with political passions and uncertainty, especially in Florida, an important swing state. The only evidence of any change included a brief handshake with Mr. Castro at Nelson Mandela’s funeral last year and some minor changes to the Cuba embargo, allowing Cuban-Americans to send more money home. As a candidate in 2008, Mr. Obama was scorned by his Republican opponent, Senator John McCain of Arizona, for his pledge to meet with Raúl Castro, the president of Cuba, “at a time and place of my choosing.” Mr. Obama said then that if Cuba took steps toward democracy and released all political prisoners, “we will take steps to begin normalizing relations.”
Now, with no election on the horizon and his legacy in mind, Mr. Obama has decided to go big on one of America’s most vexing foreign policy issues, establishing diplomatic relations with Cuba and doing what he can without congressional action to all but end the 1960 embargo on the island nation. But for six years, Mr. Obama made little progress on an issue fraught with political passions and uncertainty, especially in Florida, an important swing state. The only evidence of a change included a brief handshake with Mr. Castro at Nelson Mandela’s funeral in South Africa last year and some minor revisions to the embargo against Cuba, easing travel restrictions and allowing Cuban-Americans to send more money home. The president’s lack of action angered activists who believed that he would follow through on his campaign promises. Senator Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, and Senator Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, collaborated on an op-ed article for the Miami Herald earlier this year that urged the president to change policy on Cuba and “heed the majority of those across the country who recognize that we have much to gain by jettisoning this Cold War relic.”
“When I came into office, I promised to re-examine our Cuba policy,” Mr. Obama said in remarks to the nation on Wednesday from the Cabinet Room in the White House. “I do not believe we can keep doing the same thing for over five decades and expect a different result.” On Wednesday, Mr. Obama finally made good on his pledge. “When I came into office, I promised to re-examine our Cuba policy,” the president said. “I do not believe we can keep doing the same thing for over five decades and expect a different result.”
The president’s unilateral action on Cuba fits a pattern that Mr. Obama has established in the twilight of his presidency. Frustrated by congressional inaction and Republican efforts to block legislation, the president has increasingly pushed the limits of his executive authority in domestic and international policy making. Mr. Obama’s unilateral action on Cuba is part of a pattern that will define the end of his presidency. Frustrated by congressional inaction and Republican efforts to block legislation, the president has increasingly pushed the limits of his executive authority in domestic and international policy making — an approach that anticipates, and largely dismisses, angry responses from his critics.
It is a go-it-alone approach that anticipates — and largely ignores — angry responses from his critics. On Wednesday, they were out in force: Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, called the president’s move “disgraceful,” calling it “just another concession to a tyranny.” Some other Cuban-Americans were equally angry. Senator Robert Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey, said Mr. Obama had “vindicated the brutal behavior of the Cuban government.” On Wednesday, those critics were out in force: Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida and a likely candidate for president in 2016, denounced the president’s move as “disgraceful” and “just another concession to a tyranny.” Mr. Rubio and other Republicans threatened to withhold funding for a new American Embassy in Havana just as they had earlier threatened to undermine the president’s immigration actions by trying to block federal money that might be needed to carry out the new policies.
The president appears willing to weather such criticism. Mr. Menendez, who has been the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, will lose that post when Republicans take control next year, making him less vital as an ally in Congress. Criticism from Republicans like Mr. Rubio is seen as par for the course among White House aides, who often shrug when it arrives. Some Cuban-Americans in the president’s party were equally angry. Senator Robert Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey, said Mr. Obama had “vindicated the brutal behavior of the Cuban government.” Mr. Menendez, however, will become a less important White House ally once Republicans take control of the Senate next month and Mr. Menendez loses his position as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Although last month’s midterm elections were a victory for Republicans, who seized control of the Senate and added to their majority in the House, the results appear to have only accelerated the president’s use of regulatory, diplomatic and executive authority. In the meantime, Mr. Obama is returning to the original case he made as a presidential candidate, casting himself as a transformational leader who is eager to discard old conventions of politics and policy in ways that appeal to the sensibilities of younger people. Although the midterm elections last month were a victory for Republicans, who took control of the Senate and added to their House majority, the results seem to have only accelerated the president’s use of regulatory, diplomatic and executive authority.
In 2007, Mr. Obama promised as a presidential candidate to push for an overhaul of the nation’s immigration laws, saying that “we must assert our values and reconcile our principles as a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws.” Last month, Mr. Obama made a unilateral move on immigration, taking actions that will allow as many as five million unauthorized residents to work in the country legally without the threat of deportation. He had promised to do so as far back as 2007, during his first presidential campaign, vowing that if he were elected the issue would be “a priority I will pursue from my very first day.”
“That is a priority I will pursue from my very first day,” he added. The president has also stepped up his actions to combat climate change after failing to win congressional support for cap-and-trade legislation early in his presidency. This year, he negotiated a climate agreement with China, and he is pushing ahead with tough new regulations on coal-fired power plants.
Instead, the White House put off consideration of immigration legislation, eventually making a push after Mr. Obama was re-elected in 2012. It was not until last month that Mr. Obama decided to act on his own, taking actions that will allow as many as five million undocumented people to work in the country legally without the threat of deportation. Last month, Mr. Obama strongly endorsed equal treatment of websites by Internet service providers, angering some Republicans who oppose efforts to regulate providers as if they were public utilities. The president’s decision to negotiate with Iran in recent years over its nuclear abilities — against the strong objections of some conservatives — followed through on one of his most contentious promises during the 2008 presidential campaign.
The president has also recently stepped up his actions to combat climate change after failing to win congressional support for cap-and-trade legislation early in his presidency. This year, he negotiated a climate agreement with China, and he is pushing ahead with tough new regulations on coal-fired power plants. By framing his moves in generational terms, the president is also seeking to make an implicit case that Republicans who oppose them are dinosaurs fighting yesterday’s battles.
His decision to push for negotiations with Iran in an attempt to limit Tehran’s nuclear capabilities — over the strong objections of some conservatives — came years after Mr. Obama promised such engagement during the 2008 presidential campaign. Those close to Mr. Obama say he was always ready to fight those battles, but the realities of the presidency got in the way.
If the president’s critics thought he might have decided to abandon some of his early campaign promises, Mr. Obama seems intent on proving them wrong.
“When we got there, we had an epic economic crisis and two wars to deal with,” Mr. Axelrod said. “It wasn’t as if he had the bandwidth or free rein to pursue every one of the issues he felt were important.”“When we got there, we had an epic economic crisis and two wars to deal with,” Mr. Axelrod said. “It wasn’t as if he had the bandwidth or free rein to pursue every one of the issues he felt were important.”
Like the Cuba decision, Mr. Obama’s actions on immigration, Iran and climate change have generated rancorous protest from critics. In the past, the reaction might have been enough to make the president and his top aides hold back. Now, Mr. Axelrod said, the president will not be stopped.
But Mr. Axelrod said the president seemed determined not to let that happen. “Either you buy into this tangled pathology of Washington and allow yourself to get maneuvered into inaction, or you resolve that you’re going to use the authority that you have,” Mr. Axelrod said. “He’s plainly going to use that.”
“Either you buy into this tangled pathology of Washington and allow yourself to get maneuvered into inaction, or you resolve that you’re going to use the authority that you have,” Mr. Axelrod said of the president. “He’s plainly going to use that.”