President of Ohio

November 5th, 2012 § 0 comments § permalink

Have you heard the candidates mention your state during the debates? How about the entire time during the campaign? Nope. Me neither.

Now of course I’m in the lowly state of Alabama with only 9 electoral votes, but chances are most Americans live in a state that simply doesn’t matter to either of these campaigns: CA, NY, WA, OR, TN, TX, OK, IL, GA…

How can you run for President of the United States of America and only have to convince a handful of states that you should be the next President of all the states?

…the actual share of voters nationally who are up for grabs is probably between just 3 percent and 5 percent in this election, polling experts say. The Obama and Romney campaigns are expected to spend on the order of $2 billion, in part to try to sway this tiny share of the electorate.

This NY Times piece goes onto describe how the campaigns are only targeting small groups of voters within counties of swing states:

A senior Romney aide, who requested anonymity discussing strategy, says the campaign’s microtargeting has identified specific swing-voter-rich counties in swing states: In Virginia, for example, a large number of swing voters are concentrated in Fairfax County, just outside the District of Columbia; in Ohio, by contrast, undecided or persuadable voters are scattered throughout the state. In some cases, demographic patterns emerge: In Arapahoe County, Colo., just outside Denver, the majority of swing voters will probably be women, the aide said.

These winner-take-all, divisions reinforce all the terrible tactics we’ve seen from both campaigns. In this digital age of advanced micro-targeting and micro-messaging the campaigns don’t need a broad message to lead the entire country, and they definitely don’t need to bother convincing anyone from across the aisle.

Supporters of the current Electoral College system argue a direct popular vote would unfairly favor big cities over rural areas, but isn’t the tyranny of Ohio worse! The candidates should be forced to appeal to as broad a group in the electorate as possible, by campaigning and appealing to all 50 states.

By building a national consensus around issues we can move past the simple answers we keep hearing on the campaign trail. One example from my state is the renaissance of car manufacturing going on here in the south. Mercedes-Benz continues to expand their plant here in Tuscaloosa. VW built a new plant in Chattanooga, TN. BMW has a plant in South CarolinaHyundai is building cars in Montgomery, AL. Stop telling me how amazing the auto-bailout was for Detroit! That’s not the only place cars are made in America!

This pandering to swing states leads to simplistic answers at best and outright terrible policy at worst. Newt Gingerich’s overt pandering during the republican primary is the strongest case for why the system is flawed. Ethanol for Iowa. Dredge the Charleston for South Carolina. Space funding and a moon base for Florida.  Basically, take money from all the other states whose votes don’t matter in the primary and give it to key states through federal spending. Thankfully, Newt lost in the primary.

The Big Picture

My biggest complaint throughout this campaign, compared to the 2008 campaign, is the lack of a big picture of what the candidates want to accomplish. Give us a meta-narrative! Tell us a story of why your vision, your party, deserves my vote.

In 2008, Obama’s slogans were hope and change, but he also painted a broad message of how we’re better together, than divided. From that belief sprang the healthcare law the administration spent much of their political capital on. The process of passing the law was less than ideal, but the goal of insurance for all was not a surprise based on the goals stated in the campaign.

That’s just one example from 2008, but tell me what the broad message is this time?

Obama: We’re getting better, because I helped stop the crisis. Everything is going to be ok. I killed Osama.
Romney: I’m a businessman. Did I mention I’m a businessman. I want to cut taxes to create more jobs.

With such a broad and diverse culture we need ideals and goals that unite all 300+ million of us instead of pandering to tiny percentages through divisive micro-messaging. After all this time of campaigning and billions of dollars spent, neither candidate has addressed most of the pressing issues that we face in the next 4 years:

How will you resolve the housing crisis?
What will you do about the unprecedented consolidation of Wall Street banks?
What will you do to reform immigration?
What can be done to address the meteoric cost increases in higher education?
What about the continued rise of costs in healthcare?
What can America as a nation do to remain competitive on the global market?
How can we fix the skills gap that continues to leave 20 million Americans unemployed?
Will we continue a foreign policy of bombing and killing our way to peace?
What will you do about the continued detainment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay?
How will you form any sort of consensus in Congress to start working again?

Call me naive for thinking census matters, then you can call me cynical for believing 95% of the votes cast tomorrow won’t matter.

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Chorus of Chatter Around One Source

July 3rd, 2012 § 1 comment § permalink

Official 2005 photo of Chief Justice John G. R...

Official 2005 photo of Chief Justice John G. Roberts (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

My attempt here is not to add more commentary to the Supreme Court ruling on the Affordable Care Act (“ObamaCare”), but instead to point out the gems within the majority opinion.

No matter which side of the issue you fall on, every educated citizen can easily follow the reasoning used to decide it.

The Framers created a Federal Government of limited powers, and assigned to this Court the duty of enforcing those limits. The Court does so today. But the Court does not express any opinion on the wisdom of the Affordable Care Act. Under the Constitution, that judgment is reserved to the people. ~ Chief Justice Roberts page 65*

* All page numbers reference the page number of the PDF not the pages printed in the document.

America is a nation of laws and the Chief Justice deferred to the legislation created and signed by the other two branches of the Federal Government. In his own words:

Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law; we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments. Those decisions are entrusted to our Nation’s elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them. It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices. ~ Chief Justice Roberts page 12

This is exactly the deference of power Republicans have been screaming about for years! “Activist judges writing laws from the bench.” Well Justice Roberts deferred to the better judgement and intentions of the elected legislators no matter how foolish the law may be. That is not for the Court to decide.

Because the Constitution permits such a tax, it is not our role to forbid it, or to pass upon its wisdom or fairness. ~ Chief Justice Roberts page 50

Justice Roberts goes to great lengths to explain why the individual mandate can not be enforced through the commerce clause, which for many conservatives should be a relief.

Congress already enjoys vast power to regulate much of what we do. Accepting the Government’s theory [to use the Commerce Clause] would give Congress the same license to regulate what we do not do, fundamentally changing the relation between the citizen and the Federal Government. ~ Chief Justice Roberts page 29

Instead of yammer on about how Justice Roberts ruled on the case though, you can read it directly in his beautifully penned 59 page opinion. And that is the real heart of my post – why let bumbling fools filter the news down to you in small understandable spoonfuls when the source material is so rich and freely available?

The next 126 days will be filled with more hot air and screaming about this topic than anyone could wish for. Why not go to the source and mute the power of the fools who incorrectly translate such a key decision?

The power of our country is not in the ruling class or the media industry translating the news down to us. Through open and immediate access online I read through the 59 pages of text in the time that most reporters were finishing their first articles. The only form of genuine protest I know against the ignorance spewed on Fox News is not by watching MSNBC or any other news source – it’s by better informing myself with the true source of information. Many articles and videos now include links to the source material. The reporters role is still meaningful in providing summaries to more issues than I have time to investigate, but for major issues such as this Supreme Court ruling why read 10 articles when I can read 59 pages from one of the sharpest minds in the country?

The writers of all this commentary get paid to fill pages with words or TV airtime with words. Justice Roberts cogently laid out his reasoning for future generations of judges and everyday Americans to understand how such a crucial decision can be made without defaulting to partisan answers. Conservatives are flabbergasted that Chief Justice Roberts would “turn to the dark side,” ruling in favor of ObamaCare, but that’s really a terrible summary of what happened here. Read the source material! Vast portions include quotes from the Framers and their efforts to create a pragmatic country governed by clear laws.

As we have explained, “the framers of the Constitution were not mere visionaries, toying with speculations or theories, but practical men, dealing with the facts of political life as they understood them, putting into form the government they were creating, and prescribing in language clear and intelligible the powers that government was to take.” ~ Chief Justice Roberts quoting from historic rulings on page 30

Ultimately, if America elects a massive majority of Democrats to the House, almost a super majority to the Senate, and a Democrat to the White House then the American people have spoken. For the high court to overturn the law on the basis of partisan views would be the greatest betrayal to the people who, however mislead or foolish you might think they are, worked to pass healthcare reform.

If you have a better plan go forth and elect your own fools.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Where Am I?

You are currently browsing entries tagged with United States at Ben Goertz.