“The Election – Character or Issues?” Sydney Williams
http://www.swtotd.blogspot.com
While it appears that we Americans don’t agree on a lot, there is general agreement that our political center has been squeezed by extremists at both ends of the political spectrum. Democrats have moved to the left – toward European-style social engineering. Republicans have become more populist, not in an authoritarian way, but in the sense that they represent ordinary people opposed to elitists in government, labor, finance, business and education. At the far-left are those who fly the Palestinian flag, and sick climate-cultists who destroy works of art to bring attention to their agenda. At the far-right are those who fly the Confederate flag, and xenophobes who would deport illegal aliens. Political choice has become more difficult for those inclined toward a politics of consensus and collaboration.
An emphasis on character by the media has replaced a focus on issues that affect the electorate. While Kamala Harris may have an edge when it comes to character, she is no paragon of virtue. Both candidates are fodder for the tabloids. The crucial differences between them are not in their character; it is their policy prescriptions. Like most politicians, Ms. Harris is chameleon-like when it comes to where she stands, except on issues like abortion, climate change and Hamas. She was, keep in mind, ranked the most liberal of all U.S. Senators in 2019 by GovTrack.us, a non-partisan Congress tracker. In contrast, Mr. Trump, apart from lacking a sense of humor, being a protectionist on trade, and wanting to make America great again, seems devoid of a consistent political ideology. But he has the advantage of not being a pietistic professional politician.
As November draws closer, voters must grapple with multiple issues: the economy/inflation, healthcare, foreign policy/defense, immigration, debt/deficits, abortion, education, climate/environment, entitlements, infrastructure, the Supreme Court, along with myriad concerns regarding the cultural environment, from the role of families, the threat from identity politics, to biological men participating in women’s sports.
There are too many issues to comment on all, but allow me to make remarks regarding a few. A report from Statista.com published on July 5th polled voters’ concerns: “government/poor leadership” (21%), “immigration” (18%), the “economy in general” (17%), and “the high cost of living/inflation” (12%). Biden of course will be gone in just over five months and with him the “poor leadership” that has been a hallmark of his Presidency. The other issues, however, remain. Open borders, both south and north, have let in millions of undocumented illegal immigrants who, with help from the federal government, have spread throughout our nation. Rounding up and deporting them will be impossible, even those with criminal records. In my opinion the number of permanent immigrant visas should be increased, but in the meantime borders should be sealed preventing anymore from arriving illegally. As for the economy, over the past seventy years GDP growth, despite productivity gains of about 300%, has been in gradual decline, from the four percent plus range in the first three decades after World War II, to around three percent plus in the last two decades of the 20th Century, to under three percent thus far in 21st Century.
During the past seventy years there have been recessions and spurts of higher growth, but under leadership from both Republicans and Democrats the gradual decline in GDP growth has been manifest. Regulation, taxes, government spending, dependency, a lack of personal responsibility and accountability, and the negative consequences of a DEI strategy have all had their effects. For example, a report from the House Budget Committee Chair, Jodey Arrington (R-TX), on April 4, 2023 cited the growth in transfer payments: In 2022 the federal government paid $4.1 trillion in transfer payments to individuals, 65% of the entire budget. The growth in transfer payments has been persistent and seemingly inexorable, from 1.5% of the budget in 1945, to 26% in 1969, to 50% in 1994. No politician from either Party wants to take away benefits, and in fact The Biden-Harris proposals of free community college, student loan forgiveness, increasing food stamp benefits and expanding Medicaid eligibility will add to what is fast approaching an intolerable burden for taxpayers. Voters must ask: which Party is more likely to address threats from the Charybdis of increased individual dependency and the Scylla of unaffordable government?
The world has grown more dangerous over the last three and a half years. In taking office, Mr. Biden reversed Mr. Trump’s policies toward Iran, re-engaging the Obama-era Iran nuclear deal, which emboldened the world’s greatest exporter of terrorism. He forsook the Abraham Accords. In August 2021, Mr. Biden abandoned Afghanistan to the Taliban, leaving behind billions of dollars in military equipment and bases. In February 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine, initiating Europe’s longest-running war since World War II. In the past three years China’s naval fleet has surpassed that of the United States. During Mr. Biden’s Presidency another dozen countries joined China’s Belt & Road initiatives, which now includes 150 countries in Asia, Europe, the Middle East, Africa and South America. While Mr. Biden was an ardent supporter of Israel immediately following the Hamas-directed October 7 slaughter, he now urges restraint.
On education, Democrats are against choice; they favor subsidies to buyers of electric vehicles, and they would like Congress to pass an Amendment that would term-limit Supreme Court Justices and subject them to Congressional oversight. At the Kentland Community Center on June 7 in Landover, Maryland, Vice President Kamala Harris claimed that “the right to be safe is a civil right.” Is that what we want? Students are told that their colleges provide safe spaces, where one can hide from offensive words. Books, such as Huckleberry Finn are banned because readers might find them hurtful. Is that what we should strive for – a nation of Milquetoasts? America was discovered and settled by those who braved the elements and risked their lives. In like manner, daring astronauts took to space sixty years ago. Men and women have bet their fortunes on inventions, many of which have vastly improved lives. If we are to believe that to be safe is a civil right, what will come of risk takers, of innovation? If the nation needs defending, will anyone risk their life? In the August issue of The Spectator, the editors wrote of the adverse consequences of a society consumed with safetyism: “…a zeal for safe spaces begets academic stagnation and persecution; and avoiding the emotional risk of commitment brings with it collapsing birth rates and loneliness.”
We live in a time when individual freedom confronts state supremacy. We need government to care for those unable to care for themselves, but government should be, as was originally intended, limited and constrained. It was established to guarantee our basic rights. Individually, the ingredients for a fulfilled life include independence, self-reliance, curiosity, aspiration, and a willingness to work hard and take risk. Despite the illusion of progressives, none of us are equal, something obvious to those who watch the Olympics, but we are each gifted with unique qualities. It is those we must focus on. Given the candidates in this election, Democrats and the media will speak endlessly of “threats to democracy” and will attack Mr. Trump for being Trump. Republicans, however, should stick to issues.
Comments are closed.
