Long ago, I voted for a Republican to become our next president of the U.S. It was an uneducated vote as I was young, easily influenced by movie stardom and not interested in the issues.
I'm more educated now. I treasure my right to vote and, it seems, perpetually cast my presidential vote for the Yellow Dog. I gave up considering that I'd ever vote Republican, until I had the opportunity to listen to a former U.S. Senator, a Republican, speak candidly about today's political climate.
The Senator said a lot of really good stuff--and as a few days have passed, I don't claim that everything he said is related with total accuracy in what I'm writing. But these are the thoughts I'm mulling over--
American voters need to decide if they want more government or less government. Voters have become self-indulgent. We no longer want to hear about how one or the other candidate's policies will make America better or stronger--we want to hear how policies will benefit "us," and only "us," so that is what politicians tell us. No matter how short or long a politician's term in office may be, the day after he or she is elected, he is once again running for office. The Federal budget has always cycled through budget surpluses and budget deficits; however, we are stuck in an increasing deficit situation because elected officials are afraid to compromise. What makes Washington DC work is compromise--a willingness to give and take so that good policy, that benefits many, gets made into law. That has changed largely due to voters that want only what benefits them. Politicians--good politicians--who are willing to compromise are punished--they lose elections. Voters will not vote for them and that is why politicians won't compromise and nothing is accomplished in Washington DC. The budget deficit is at a precarious position--if interest rates rise, and they are historically low, the amount the U.S. government owes to its creditors will skyrocket and dramatically deepen the deficit. More than 70% of the U.S. budget consists of mandated transfer payments such as social security and medicare. There is very little in the budget that can be increased or decreased.
As other smart, thought-provoking stuff was said, I thought--when will I hear any candidate running for office speak as simply, carefully and clearly as this former U.S. Senator? And then the Senator threw me a carrot that renews my interest in the Republican Party--even as I cast my yellow-dog Democrat vote this November.
The Senator said, and I paraphrase with the uncertainty of not having written down his words: If the Republican party loses this election, it will have to conduct a serious post-mortem of 'what went wrong.' It may have to separate itself from the narrow group wrapped up in social issues that drive away huge blocks of the electorate such as women and Hispanics and return to its historic role as the party of fiscal responsibility.
My wise voting ears are listening. I want a Republican presidential defeat in November that is painful enough to recast the party into one that stays out of my womanly business. Then perhaps both parties can focus on the economy and their vision for fixing Social Security and Medicare and how to keep Americans employed and medically solvent.
With political parties freed from worry about what I or my daughters, neighbors, friends and complete strangers might do or not do--or whom they might choose to marry or not marry--the candidates can run good hard-fought races. And the winners can arrive in Washington, DC, ready to compromise.
No comments:
Post a Comment