Obama, of course, is very different from LBJ and governing in a vastly different time. While Johnson excelled at cajoling legislators, Obama reportedly finds it distasteful. Where Johnson could offer new federal programs, Obama must maneuver in an age where the federal government is distrusted. And while Johnson had full government coffers, Obama lives in an era of crushing fiscal constraint.

Those differences, though, make Obama's second inaugural address and Tuesday's State of the Union all the more remarkable. As Richard W. Stevenson noted in the New York Times, "he continued trying to define a 21st-century version of liberalism that could outlast his time in office and do for Democrats what Reagan did for Republicans."

'A SMARTER GOVERNMENT'



Throughout, the speech, Obama emphasized the collective over the individual, and concluded by hailing the notion of "citizenship." "This country only works when we accept certain obligations to one another," he declared, "and to future generations."

He was careful, however, to avoid comparisons with the big government programs of the 1960s.

"It is not a bigger government we need," Obama emphasized, "but a smarter government."

A central question, though, is: Can government be smarter, particularly in an age of partisanship? Can it counter the global economic forces that are battering the middle class and poor?

Johnson faced challenges as well, but he was a master of persuading his political opponents to support his proposals. Whether they agreed with them or not.

Robert A. Caro, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author and famed Johnson biographer, argued in an interview with Reuters last spring that Johnson's "awesome" political skills could have overcome today's partisan gridlock in Washington.

"It is in the nature of political genius," Caro said, "to find a way to solve problems no one else can solve."

In truth, making government "smart" is enormously difficult. Technological changes that moved manufacturing overseas were largely beyond the control of government. A global competition for talent that creates staggeringly high wages for a skilled handful is difficult to reverse. Widening partisanship at home makes any major policy change difficult to implement.

Obama clearly exaggerated the ability of the federal government alone to revive the middle class and the poor. Government programs alone cannot counter the global economic changes that are putting so much pressure on average Americans. And without serious entitlement reform, the federal government will be unable to pay for the initiatives Obama outlined.

At the same time, Republican orthodoxy is wrong. Slashing the size of government will not magically solve our problems. Novel policies that move beyond 1960s liberalism and 1980s conservatism are needed.

WHERE ARE THE 'BEST IDEAS'?

