Analysis: How the State of the Union speech devolved

In 2010, President Obama blasted the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, with six of the justices sitting just a few feet in front of him. Obama said it “reversed a century of law” and would “open the floodgates for special interests.” Justice Samuel Alito shook his head, muttering, “That’s not true.”

Here’s the clip:

Some criticized the president as being rude and Alito has not come back to attend another SOTU address.

Chief Justice John Roberts has questioned whether the justices should follow the lead of Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas and not appear at the speech at all, saying: “The image of having the members of one branch of government standing up, literally surrounding the Supreme Court, cheering and hollering while the court — according to the requirements of protocol — has to sit there expressionless, I think is very troubling.”

A year earlier, while Obama was praising his plan for health care reform in a speech to a joint session of Congress, Republican House member Joe Wilson of South Carolina shouted, “You lie!” It didn’t happen at a State of the Union address but caused an uproar, with Wilson issuing an apology and being formally rebuked in the House:

Putting all of the criticisms of the SOTU address together, is it time to put the speech out to pasture?

Amity Shlaes, who recently authored a best-selling biography of Calvin Coolidge, doesn’t think so.

“The state of the union is always a good snapshot no matter what,” Shlaes said in a telephone interview with New Mexico Watchdog. “Should it be shorter? Probably. Should it be less pandering to groups? Probably. But I don’t object it at all … It’s a good snapshot of what’s going on in (the presidents’) heads and their planning.”

Michael Rocca, Associate Professor and Director, Political Science Honors Program at the University of New Mexico agrees with Shlaes.

“In one respect, it is theater but in another respect I think it is valuable,” Rocca said. “It lends itself to some credibility and legitimacy to stand before Congress and the people tell them what (the president) wants done.”

Besides, given the political realties, it’s difficult to imagine sitting presidents passing up a chance to deliver what can amount to an extended campaign speech in front of the entire country and an international audience.

Having said that, if more people come to see the State of the Union address as merely an exercise in emptiness, it may run the risk of simply being ignored.

And for politicians, that truly is a fate worse than death.

Contact Rob Nikolewski at [email protected] and follow him on Twitter @robnikolewski