Somehow Obama came and went within a block of my office today and I never noticed. Now I know why they call it the “Secret” Service. Anyway, while he was here he made a case for reducing the prison population and providing free college, among other things. Free college – it sounds like a utopian goal, right? I found one article that estimates how much that would cost the federal government – about $63 billion dollars a year, on top of what state and local governments are already spending. That sounds like a lot, except that according to this article the government is currently spending about $69 billion on higher education grants, work-study programs, and tax breaks. This is pretty astonishing if true – we might be able to spend less and get more. The only losers would be private and for-profit colleges. The obvious beneficiaries would be a more educated, skilled, and hopefully creative and innovative work force that we need for the coming decades and beyond.

Which left me thinking about Obama’s legacy. I think history may judge him kindly for many reasons, although there have also been some really bad things that have happened on his watch. Part of how history judges him will depend on whether the really bad things get worse from here, whether or not that is beyond his control.

First, the good stuff:

• The economy did not fall apart completely after the financial crisis. I think history will eventually judge that he made some tough decisions that seemed unfair and unpopular at the time, but ultimately quelled the panic that could have otherwise threatened the viability of the system itself.
• He got better financial regulation and limits on irresponsible risk taking in place compared to what we had before the crisis. As long as there isn’t another major crisis in the near future, I think history will say he made progress against tough odds and did the most he could possibly do politically. If there is another severe crisis, history will rightly point out that the reforms weren’t enough, and they were on his watch.
• He helped us take a big step toward universal health care. Advanced, industrialized, civilized countries have universal health care. We do not, but now we are closer. It was a huge fight against incredible odds, and I think history will judge it kindly as finally breaking a decades-old deadlock and putting us on the right path.
• He ended, at least kinda sorta more or less, major American involvement in two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. These were bloody, expensive, unpopular, and achieving nothing. I think history will judge this kindly.
• I’ll put killing Osama bin Laden in the win column. It was justice. Although I found the euphoric response to his death a little sad.
• Incredibly, he has defused both the Cuba situation and the Iran situation, two decades-old Cold War conflicts that have persisted until now for no obvious reason. History will tell us whether the Iran deal is a momentary pause in the Middle Eastern nuclear arms race, or the beginning of the end of it.
• He’s taken some steps toward climate change regulation, nothing even close to sufficient but probably the most that was possible politically.

The bad stuff:

• Riots in metro St. Louis and Baltimore.
• The greater Middle East has turned into a massive blood bath, from North Africa to Afghanistan and Pakistan. History will tell us whether these conflicts spread, spawn international terrorism, or even go nuclear.
• Relations with Russia and China have both soured considerably, to the point where a major war, or even a nuclear war, seems possible where it would have been almost unthinkable eight years ago.

The riots are just a little embarrassing, but you can probably say that racial and inequality issues in the U.S. were more on the surface and openly talked about during Obama’s presidency than during the previous couple decades, and you need to acknowledge and define problems before you can solve them. I don’t think history will blame him for creating these problems or making them worse.

The potential for serious geopolitical conflict and even nuclear war is a horrifying development that doesn’t bode well for our civilization, especially when we need to be coming together to deal with serious global emergencies like pollution, food, and climate change. Can we blame Obama for his response to any of this? I’ll admit he hasn’t been as good as his predecessors at brinksmanship. Leaders from Kennedy to Reagan to Bush were willing to play a massive game of chicken, convincing potential enemies that we would not hesitate to go to war at the smallest provocation, and that we were willing to accept the consequences however dire. You can argue they gambled recklessly and were lucky enough to win. Our enemies were generally terrified and backed down. Obama was less of a cowboy, and never even played one on TV. He has been more risk averse, weighing the consequences of military conflict vs. diplomatic and economic measures, and generally choosing the latter. These are tough decisions that take courage either way. Here again, I think his legacy depends on whether things calm down, or whether there are serious conflicts down the road with roots that can be traced back to decisions he made.

My summary: If there is not a major financial crisis or war in the next 10-20 years, I think we will look back at him as a good president who avoided those things and made a major course correction in the health care system. If major crises or wars happen, they will overshadow his accomplishments and he may ultimately get a share of the blame. It was a tough moment in history to be president, and I for one think he was a courageous and mature leader who did the most anyone could do within our constraining political system.