How much will Obama’s being black matter in the end? In, say, 20 years, will it be a major or minor aspect of his presidency and, to the extent that it will matter, in what specific way will it matter most?

As much as one would like to see Obama’s presidency as transformative for American race relations, it is hard to see this in the record or in the cards. The spate of recent deaths at the hands of police, and the protests against them, make it quite clear (as it already was to anyone paying attention) that we still live in a racially divided society. The role of the black vote in helping Obama to carry three southern states in 2008 (two of them again in 2012) was certainly historic, but it is not easy to see the carry-over effect that you ask about.

The problem is that although Obama has given eloquent speeches on the subject of race, he has never defined himself as a race leader, and he has felt tightly constrained in his ability to articulate racial grievances. Perhaps as a consequence, Obama’s record on black appointments to the administration has not been particularly notable, in comparison with Clinton or even with George W. Bush. If anything, political adversaries use Obama’s presidency as a weapon against racial issues or policies by arguing that there are now no barriers to black advancement, so their problems must be of their own making.

But here is one historic trend-break that has occurred during the Obama administration and that has major significance for the well-being of African-Americans: the beginnings of a decline in the national prison population, after decades of expansion. As with many other social trends, the reversal has many causes, from court orders about overcrowding to changes in public opinion regarding drug offenses. But the Obama administration deserves a fair share of credit, particularly for the decline in the number of federal prisoners. In 2010, Obama signed the Fair Sentencing Act, reducing prison time for convictions involving crack cocaine. Under Attorney General Eric Holder, sentencing guidelines were made retroactive, leading to the release of thousands. To date, the reductions have been small compared to the total incarcerated population, but the reversal is historic, and its disproportionate significance for African-Americans is evident.

In assessing Obama’s historical legacy, what do you believe will be the aspect of his presidency that is currently least understood or misunderstood? In other words, for better or worse, what single thing looks smallest now but will matter most to future historians?

Barack Obama’s presidency is poised for reassessment, and the elements of a new narrative are already emerging. It is all but impossible to say what will matter most to future historians, but what is likely to matter most to humankind is global climate change, an issue on which Obama is quietly building a powerful legacy. The centerpiece is the agreement with China announced in November, which qualifies as historic even if it will need to be much modified in the future (as it surely will). Other executive-branch actions put real teeth in environmental regulations, including tightening of standards on fuel efficiency and power-plant emissions. The administration also deserves credit for subsidizing rapid technological progress in solar- and wind-power alternatives. Taken together, these policies no doubt fall short as a response to the challenge. But history will identify this administration as a turning point in the policy response to what may be the most serious threat facing the world.

Will future historians concur with the administration’s own narrative of having saved the country from another Great Depression? Or will Obama’s economic legacy be seen as a lackluster performance or, worse, a failed attempt to reform the U.S. economy in any meaningful way?

Economic performance and reform will be a centerpiece in the reassessment of Obama’s legacy. Thomas Edsall recently asked: �What has the Democratic Party done for [the white working class] lately?� The answer: a heckuva lot. To begin with, the economic recovery from the depths of the Great Recession. Not as rapid as anyone wanted, but employment growth has been steady and sustained for more than five years, a record that compares favorably to that of other presidents and especially to that of other countries in the world. Does Obama really deserve credit for this? Macroeconomic outcomes are always the product of luck and exogenous factors as well as policy. But the stimulus of 2009 helped somewhat, and matters might have been much worse had he not resisted calls for austerity. Perhaps more important, Obama supported Ben Bernanke’s expansionary policies at the Federal Reserve, and he appointed Janet Yellen as Bernanke’s successor to maintain those policies.

Secondly, Obama and the Democrats have protected Social Security and Medicare against what could have been severe cuts or damaging privatization. Much of the white working class may see these as benefits they earned rather than handouts�the programs are deliberately designed to foster that perception�but that does not mean they are invulnerable to attacks.

A third new development that dates from the Obama administration is the increase in real wages at the low end of the distribution, after decades of stagnation. No, this is not a full-blown assault on inequality (though the progressivity of the tax system has increased somewhat under Obama). But the era of wage stagnation seems to have turned around, and the new trend is likely to continue, because of increases in the legal minimum wage. Not much of this upturn is the direct result of Obama’s policies: Most of it has occurred in cities and states, many of which also voted for Republicans in the recent elections. But Obama has called for an increase in the federal minimum to $10.10 per hour, and he has imposed this level as the minimum for federal contractors. So future economic historians will be able to say that Obama was on the right side of this historic swing.

Under economic �reform,� I would list two main items: the Affordable Care Act and financial regulation. Despite its high political cost, Obamacare has been surprisingly successful and will be difficult to undo in the future. It will form one of the foundations of the health-care system as it evolves, and historians will recognize this administration as the turning point, even if the system ultimately takes on quite a different shape from the present structure. Obamacare also deserves some credit for the slowing of what long seemed to be an inexorable increase in health costs. This historic trend-break benefits Americans from all socioeconomic classes.

The Dodd-Frank Act is undoubtedly not the ultimate answer to the risk of financial crisis. But it did include Elizabeth Warren’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which would not have been approved without Obama’s support. The significance of the CFPB can only increase in the future.

Will the Obama years come to be seen as a major realignment in Democratic politics? As a historian, how would you predict the longevity of his coalition?

American political �coalitions� are so loosely structured and uninstitutionalized that they inevitably reconfigure themselves over time. But it is hard to see a major change from the current alignment in the near future. The Democratic Party appeals to strong majorities of African-Americans, Hispanics, and women, especially college-educated women.

Persistence of the coalition does not of course mean that it will always prevail (clearly not). But its success will depend on turnout levels and on whether the candidate can also appeal to a respectable percentage of the white working class.

Since the questionnaire does not have a category headed �Social Change,� let me add a few more thoughts on some of the members of this coalition, since their record will also be part of the Obama legacy. Women have continued to make progress during these years, both in occupational and economic status and in assertive articulation of their social and economic interests. Obama has been on the right side of this history. The Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act was one of his earliest legislative accomplishments, overturning a ludicrous Supreme Court decision. He has consistently supported reproductive rights. He has appointed more women to the cabinet than any previous president. And he tops off this record by appointing Janet Yellen as the first woman to chair of the Federal Reserve, another historic move.

The record is similarly strong on sexual orientation. Obama supported the repeal of �Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,� enacted during the Clinton administration. He announced his support for gay marriage and approved same-sex partner benefits for public employees. The administration declined to defend the Clinton-era Defense of Marriage Act in court and did not appeal its overthrow by the Supreme Court. True, Obama was not really a leader on this issue. But the same can be said of Presidents Kennedy and Johnson on civil rights. The point is that, as in those examples, Obama was receptive and ultimately responsive to these demands for social change, as other presidents may well not have been. Again, he is on the right side of this history, and history will regard him in that light.

The newest members to join the coalition are Hispanics, whose electoral importance will only increase with time. Obama has done much to improve their well-being and elicit their support. He nominated Sonia Sotomayor as the first Hispanic Supreme Court justice, a truly historic moment. In a bold executive action, he announced an end to deportation of families, a move that should contribute to stabilization of the Hispanic population. And he has reestablished diplomatic relations with Cuba, a major policy shift that is supported by the great majority of Hispanic Americans.

What will be seen as Obama’s single most significant accomplishment?

Obamacare. The policy will continue to evolve and to be controversial, but it will always be associated with Obama.

Will Obama’s reputation have improved or declined in 20 years?

Improved. The change is already starting.

Which of his speeches and phrases will be the most enduring?

Phrases like �audacity of hope� and �Yes, We Can� are snappy and popular. But of greater significance and endurance might be: �Climate change is a fact� (State of the Union 2014).

In which presidential mode was Obama the most effective: orator, legislator, commander-in-chief, consoler of the nation, or some other mode?

I wish I could say orator or consoler, but half the country is just not willing to listen. The policy legacy will probably be of more lasting significance.

Will the image of Obama overshadow his accomplishments, in the manner of JFK?

I don’t think so: Obama has less flash and more substance.

Who will be seen as the most consequential member of his Cabinet or senior staff?

A mark of Obama’s administration is the virtual absence of top advisers who have persisted from the start. So my answer is one exception to that rule: Michelle Obama.