Citizenship: More than just Voting?

While reading the news this morning, an interesting article about Obama's tendency to "scold" the American people caught my eye. Though Obama has been known to tell people "not just want they want to hear but what they need to hear"1 since his campaign began in 2007, he has recently drawn a lot of fire from Republicans and Democrats alike for criticizing and advising everyone from average citizens to the Supreme Court. While almost all of his suggestions, such as eating healthier and exercising more, are good ideas, many question whether or not it is the President's place to lecture the American citizenry.

Undoubtedly, Obama's position is understandable. Passing health care reform, for example, proves useless without lifestyle changes (such as healthier eating) by individuals receiving such care. Popular support and participation is vital to the success of almost any law, and the policies Obama has planned are no exception. The environmental, health, and educational reforms he has planned all will require a great deal of effort from both the people and the government. Yet the public attitudes Obama faces are everything but the sort required for his plans to work: Americans' expectations of their government are extreme and unbounded, whereas their willingness to contribute and sacrifice is often minimal, at best. This is not to say that no one goes out and volunteers or, for example, takes shorter showers to help improve their nation and world. These types of people and actions are very present in our society, but, unfortunately, they are by no means the standard. Statistics such as obesity rates and fast food sales indicate all the more how unwilling, or at the very least unable, most Americans are to change their actions for their own good, let alone for the greater good. Thus, officials like Obama may find it difficult and even frustrating to try and serve a general populace that all too often behaves more like a whiny toddler (all take and no give) than a group of mature adults.

That said, I don't know that it is entirely justifiable or politically apt for Obama to be criticizing in the manner he has. Obviously, these trends of warped expectations and inaction need to change, but should he be the catalyst? What Obama is talking about is changing our social values - he is asking for something more than our democratic duties outlined by the Constitution and 200+ years of tradition - and so he may be overstepping his boundaries, even if his advice falls perfectly within the realm of free speech. Alternatively, the lifestyle changes he suggests do serve the greater good, and since he isn't mandating these changes, there is really no infringement upon our personal freedoms. Ultimately, though, the more important question is whether or not our civic duty should include contributing to our community through observing these social values.

Personally, I believe that if we expect our government to achieve a public goal, it is wrong and unfair of us to purposefully act against that goal. If we want Medicare, Medicaid, and future legislation to ensure our health, we shouldn't eat supersized meals from the dollar menu to the point where we're having heart attacks in our 30s and 40s. As long as we have high expectations of our government, so must we set the bar for ourselves. The jury may still be out on a presidential role in enforcing these civic values, but, realistically, if we want things to work, we have to pitch in too.

What do you think? Should healthy living and environmentalism, for example, be part of our civic values? Should President Obama, or any public official for that matter, remind us of or even define what these values are?

1. (according to Josh Earnest, White House Deputy Press Secretary)