Obama as anti-business moves into mainstream discussion

He also argued once again that Obama’s health care overhaul, which passed into law in March, is a dramatic step toward putting the country on a sustainable path. He cited numbers from the Congressional Budget Office to support this argument, even though the CBO director has directly contradicted Bernstein’s assertion on this point.

“The long term fiscal challenges this nation faced had to be addressed through health care reform,” Bernstein said. “If you look at the CBO score on that you see the tremendous impact that has on helping to deal with the long term fiscal constraint which any business person will tell you is essential for creating a positive economic climate.”

The CBO did score the health bill as reducing the deficit by $143 billion over the first 10 years. But CBO director Doug Elmendorf called those reductions “small steps.”

“The rising costs of health care will put tremendous pressure on the federal budget during the next few decades and beyond,” Elmendorf wrote on May 28. “In CBO’s judgment, the health legislation enacted earlier this year does not substantially diminish that pressure.”

Obama backers also like to point out that corporate profits are expected to be 65 percent higher in 2010 than in 2008. But that fact needs two pieces of context. First, 2008 was the year the market nearly collapsed and profits took a nose dive. And second, businesses are not using profits to hire but are instead sitting on a collective $1.6 trillion in cash reserves, mostly due to uncertainty that many believe has been created by massive regulatory regimes created in the president’s health law and the financial regulation bill.

“The business community understands that this president has very little regard for what it takes to succeed in a competitive economy today,” said Tony Fratto, a former Bush administration Treasury and White House spokesman, in an interview by e-mail. “They have led a regulatory assault, a tax assault, an assault on capital, on profits, on compensation — even a rhetorical assault, and they sit in the White House and wonder where the jobs are.”

Even in Obama’s remarks on trade at the White House Wednesday, one economic expert noticed an attempt by the president to continue sounding populist notes even while casting himself as on the side of business.

“Too much government regulation and spending can stifle innovation, hamper confidence and growth, and hurt business and families. But a government that does too little can be just as irresponsible as a government that does too much,” Obama said. “After all, in the absence of sound oversight, responsible businesses are forced to compete against unscrupulous and underhanded businesses, who are unencumbered by any restriction on activities that might harm the environment, take advantage of middle class families, or, as we’ve seen, threaten to bring down the entire financial system. That’s bad for everybody.”

The economic expert, who spoke about the president’s speech on the condition of anonymity, said Obama’s rhetoric was “an effort to mend fences following the relentless demonizing [of business] he found expedient for health care and financial reform.”

“On the one hand he is making nice to business and on the other explaining why government intervention is necessary, but this time couched in terms of protecting ‘good’ business from ‘unscrupulous’ business,” the expert said.

Bernstein defended the president’s criticisms of business.

“When the president has felt that folks from any sector of the economy have acted in ways that are hurtful to the majority of the American people, he’s called them out on that,” he said.

Email Jon Ward and follow him on Twitter