An Election About Something

Well, Election Day is here and the conventional wisdom about the campaign seems to have shifted. Even liberals like me are pondering dramatic moves to the center as we consider the alternatives of gridlock,  compromise, and problem solving. For all of the fire generated by the most committed liberals and the most committed conservatives, the truth is the vast middle wants nothing more than to see progress.

Lest we forget in the midst of all the ad hominem declarations that this race was about nothing, let us recall that, notwithstanding some of the incredibly petty arguments, at moments this race was about something, something quite large.

Including the largely unregulated outside PAC’s that supported them, each candidate raised and spent about $1 Billion. The Center for Responsive Politics reports $858 million was raised by outside groups brought into existence by the Citizen’s United decision. Of that amount CRP reports that 69% went to fund Romney's effort. This is not surprising, considering the super wealth that was the source of the vast majority of this money. Consider this: 900 individuals contributed 60% of the $858 million, over $500 million to the Super PAC’s and other deregulated groups. Just 149 individuals, 149, contributed over 1/3 of the total of $858 million.

When you hear all the plaudits and false claims of only in America Democracy today remember that out of a country of 315 million people, less than 1,000 citizens made a concerted effort to buy this election, the overwhelming majority of them for a conservative candidate that promised to lower their taxes. As America seems to work to sell its highest office to the highest bidder, let us remember that around the world, in Egypt, in Burma, in Tunisia and in Libya, and in dozens of other countries around the world elections are also taking place. America has a unique claim to unencumbered, non-military, handovers of the levers of Government, but increasingly we are not alone. Increasingly the unique dynamic in our elections, as compared to much of the rest of the world, is the influence of those on the extreme fringes of wealth and privilege on our electoral process.

At the moment, the country seems on the precipice of making a decision which flies in the face of the avalanche of advertising which attempted to bury the President. But, and this is a rather large BUT, that will not settle the argument over what has become an undemocratic process to unprecedented extremes. That is something, a pretty big deal.

On Healthcare there can be little argument that this election is a referendum on the Affordable Care Act, ObamaCare. Going back to 2010 when the Republicans swept into control of the House largely on their commitment to repeal the ACA, how one side or the other, one candidate or another, positioned themselves on this issue was largely a litmus test as to the true commitment to Party. On the Republican side this forced even the Stepfather of ObamaCare, the Republican candidate Mitt Romney, to abandon his own authorship and promise to repeal.  Every single Republican candidate promised to do the same during the nomination process.

For many Republicans repeal is not adequate. The larger goal has become to separate Government from any Healthcare Guarantee for America. To that end the Ryan Budget proposed draconian cuts to Medicaid, the Healthcare program for the poor. The nearly 1/3 cut over the next ten years would sever a basic safety-net cord for millions of our fellow citizens. By contrast Obama’s healthcare plan would increase by 17 million the number of Americans on Medicaid, with the Federal government picking up the cost for the working poor who can neither pay for their insurance, or the penalties for lack of coverage. One can argue the merits of that one way or the other, but for those of us informed on these issues and making our decisions accordingly, it cannot be said that this is nothing.

In the same vein, The Romney/Ryan plan envisions eliminating Medicare as a guaranteed program for seniors. Romney did say this would only affect those who have yet to reach the age of 55. There is substantial disagreement as to the wisdom of this approach which is once again an ideologically driven crusade to separate Government from any role in Healthcare for Americans. Arguments can be made that on a voluntary basis those of us with no faith in the future of these programs ability to pay their promised benefits ought to be able to opt out. But it cannot be denied that this would leave a poorer, perhaps sicker and more desperate, group who cannot afford to leave Medicare, with diminished benefits and lesser guarantees of medical services. Whether government ought to provide a minimum standard of Healthcare for all, or just turn the whole shebang, at current levels 17% of GDP, over the private sector is a pretty big deal.  

On matters of war and peace, despite Candidate Romney’s 11^th hour conversion, there is every reason to believe he would have pursued a more aggressive, militarist policy around the world, and especially in Iran. Many, if not most, of his foreign policy advisers served in the Bush administration and were the architects of the disastrous foray into Iraq.

How many of us noticed the stories in the last week regarding the deep divisions in the Israeli political establishment on Iranian policy? In a story published in Haaretz, and picked up the NY Times, two years ago Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and Minister of Defense Barak ordered the heads of the Israeli Defense Force as well as Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, to prepare for a strike on Iran. In an extraordinary step, the military leaders refused the civilian orders for fear it would lead to war. Despite the rhetoric, both the Israeli and American public, while greatly concerned about the nuclear program in Iran, are deeply uncertain about any rush to war. It bears remembering, that last February and March when Netanyahu was in the US pounding the drumbeat of war, candidate Romney was suggesting the provactive step of having the US send additional carrier groups to the Middle East. Meanwhile,  President Obama was strengthening sanctions and arguing for time to allow the impact of the sanctions to affect the Iranian public. The Iranian currency, the Rial, has gone from 11,000 to the dollar in 2011 to over 36,000 to one today meaning the currency has about 1/3 of its purchasing power from just a year and a half ago. Various factions of the Iranian power structure are now arguing among themselves as to whether the government is taking appropriate steps, and responding adequately to the crisis the sanctions have created within the Iranian economy.  For Americans impatient with the pace of change in Iran, let us not forget the claims of a quick and easy transition in Iraq. Let us recall the 4,300 American soldiers lost, the eight year battle to leave. The Iranian military is substantially more powerful than what the Iraqis had, and the population of Iran is nearly double that of Iraq. Most all Americans harbor deep anxiety about the potential of Iran to join the group of countries in possession of nuclear weapons. The question is how does America handle that threat, and how to we work with our allies to prevent it. Matters of War and Peace, of calm reason or hot-headed reactionary militarism are pretty big deals, pretty big somethings.  

In  the final analysis, in many cases-- whether the environment or energy policy-- it’s hard to tell what the real differences between these two candidates would be. Both have offered stealth policy platforms designed to achieve election, even at the cost of a clear mandate to govern. Romney has talked of a tax cut plan which will reduce everyone’s rates, not eliminate favored deductions, and increase revenue for the purpose of balancing the budget. This is impossible, especially when tied to increases in military spending which even the Pentagon does not feel are warranted.  Obama has called for a Grand Bargain of Tax Cuts, and “Entitlement Reforms” without spelling out exactly what they will be. Will he propose raising the retirement age? Will he agree to means test Social Security and Medicare, and in so doing require people that have paid into these programs for their entire working lives be forced to give up some or all of their benefits. Conservatives could go batshit if that happens, and the 2014 election in this age of demagoguery could easily turn BOTH the Senate and the House Republican. Would the middle, which claims to want compromise, hold?  

The perspective of the leader who would lead us into these dialogues is a pretty big something. While the President has been non-committal, his opponent has stood by in silence during some  ugly incidents in the primaries. His coalition, if we are to believe it, is still fighting battles through a nearly Neanderthal lense on abortion, contraception, and even the role of women in the workplace and the society at large. Rather than honor the service of gay men and woman fighting for our country around the world, parts of the Republican coalition includes those who would boo even at the mere conversation about the integrity of their rights as American citizens. The Republican candidate stood mute, when during one of the debates hooligans shouted that we should “let him die” in reference to someone without health insurance who contracts a crippling disease. When Limbaugh called Sandra Fluke a whore, candidate Romney said that was not language he would have used. Comments on the irresponsible moochers, the 47%, notwithstanding, the Republican candidate's terror with offending anyone on his right flank, makes one wonder how he would govern our large and diverse nation.  Can someone who sides with Joe Arpaio be counted on to protect the rights of All Americans? Can someone who calls for the harshness of self-deportation as a statement of his policy on immigration be counted on to govern with any compassion for the most vulnerable among us?    

American can be quite proud that we elected our first African American President, but this election is all about two separate and distinct candidates, and the content of their character. That is really something, a pretty big deal.