Fiscal Responsibility and the GOP?
On election eve, along with the social security advertisements the GOP is running locally, the party is also talking about candidates who might vote for (or have voted for) tax increases. Of course, they forget to point out who is responsible for driving up governmental spending of late. Tax cuts mixed with spending increases are fiscally irresponsible. It's quite a change for a party that used to be considered fiscally conservative.
I am happy the advertisements will end. And, here in Rochester, GOP-sponsored "doom and gloom" advertisements seem to be outnumbering those by the Democrats. They're even branding a candidate as an out-of-touch millionaire (how much, exactly, is in the bank accounts of Bush and Cheney?). It has been another entertaining round of election tactics. But, again, I'm ready for them to end. If we could only end advertising and replace the advertisements with debates....
Source: brettdalypolitics.blogspot.com
Our next vice president?
From a McCain adviser:
“She is a diva. She takes no advice from anyone, ” said this McCain adviser, “she does not have any relationships of trust with any of us, her family or anyone else. Also she is playing for her own future and sees herself as the next leader of the party. Remember: divas trust only unto themselves as they see themselves as the beginning and end of all wisdom.”
Source: CNN
Ouch! A little in-fighting among the McCain campaign. Of course, they find themselves down in the polls, and are resorting to the politics of fear instead of discussing the issues. But, unfortunately, such tactics that involve smears (and in many cases lies) can be effective, so I think counting them out is a mistake. I expect it to be close, but problems like this and Obama's fundraising edge puts him in a favorable position. It'll be an interesting final week and change.
Source: brettdalypolitics.blogspot.com
An All New York Presidential Race?
As I read this article about Michael Bloomberg leaving the GOP and potentially entering the presidential race as an independent, it got me thinking about the possibility that the three leading nominees (Republican, Democrat, and Independent) for president in 2008 could have received their most recent political experience in New York. Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton is one of New York's representatives in the United States Senate, Rudy Giuliani is New York City's previous mayor, and Bloomberg is New York City's current mayor. While I haven't looked into it, I have to believe that would be a first.
Of course, Clinton and Giuliani have lots of work ahead of them. Clinton still holds a solid lead and I expect her to emerge, but I think Barack Obama is a strong candidate too. Giuliani might be a bit "too liberal" to get through the GOP's primaries, although he still holds a narrow lead according to most polls. Thompson, a long-time lobbyist, seems to be gaining ground. I'd be a little surprised if Rudy survives the smear tactics that are sure to occur to him due to his beliefs on gun control and abortion.
Source: brettdalypolitics.blogspot.com
American Politics: A Return to the Center
The call for change was loud and clear yesterday. As expected, the House of Representatives was won by the Democrats. But, much more surprisingly, the Democrats have taken the Senate 51-49. It seemed like an unlikely scenario going in, but with Webb's victory just called (although a recount may be requested), almost everything went perfectly for the Democrats.
So, what does this mean? Iraq has obviously been a mess. With President Bush announcing Rumsfeld is stepping down--only a week after he said he'd remain--it's clear that they were disappointed with the results and feel Iraq is the problem. And, it is to a degree. But, as Senator McCain mentioned, the GOP's spending was an issue for their base too.
What's exciting in my opinion is this should signal a return to the center. Numerous policies that got away from our nation's founding principles should be remedied. Narrow issues that appeal to single-issue voters like abortion, gay marriage, and guns didn't carry the day--it came down to the big picture. Fear also didn't tilt the election, or perhaps it did in favor of the Democrats. People may be realizing that aggression abroad only makes this nation more vulnerable.
Luckily, I think both sides see the need to compromise and work together once again. The Republicans received a very sobering message loud and clear. Democrats, I believe, realize they won a lot of tight races and in some cases they benefited from massive failure by the other candidate (or, in many cases, failure of just their candidate's party). While President Bush's power has been reduced, the incentive for government to be productive has been boosted.
In my opinion, it was a great day for America. I believe it's rarely healthy to have Congress and the Executive Branch controlled by the same party. And, thankfully, that's no longer the case. Let's get back to sensible spending, international cooperation, moderate policy making, and less indirect special interest control of our politics.
Source: brettdalypolitics.blogspot.com
Bush Healthplan Update
This is just a quick update on my previous post. This Christian Science Monitor article summarizes things well. Ultimately, it sounds like this plan has no chance as it was presented. But, I'm happy the president finally addressed the issue and put it on the table. I agree that it doesn't seem fair that those without health care are forced to spend their after-tax dollars if they want health care while those receiving discounted plans from their employer are more fortunate. So, I think he made a good point there.
However, I see two primary issues. First off, it penalizes those in states where it costs more for coverage because the cap is the same for all. That number should be adjusted so someone in a more expensive state isn't further penalized (with taxes) for receiving essentially the same plan as someone in a lower cost state who actually receives a deduction. Secondly, it sounds like they are pushing people to deductible plans. In other words, you pay the first $500 or $1, 000 out of pocket, and then they start covering you. The problem with this is it discourages preventative care. I know I'd be less likely to get a checkup if I knew it would be $500 out-of-pocket after the visit and blood work. And, we know preventative care is cheaper in the long run. Of course, unnecessary visits should be penalized.
So, kudos to the president for finally putting this on the table. Ultimately, given the efficiency and positive health indicators in other industrialized nations with national health care, I'd like the nation to examine something along those lines. In India, surgeons perform several times as many surgeries per day as American doctors. This "manufacturing-like" process sounds like a bad thing right? Well, it isn't. Their doctors make fewer mistakes during surgery. Obviously, that's an extreme example. But, despite the scare tactics, many western nations with "socialized medicine" spend half as much per capita while boasting better health statistics.
And, maybe some progress is being made at a state level in the United States. Massachusetts requires coverage, while California looks like they are going to do the same. Hopefully this will force cost reductions so America is no longer a cash cow for much of the pharmaceutical and health care industries.
Source: brettdalypolitics.blogspot.com
The 2008 Presidential Race
It keeps getting more and more interesting. Clinton and Obama are the clear front runners among the Democrats right now. Perhaps Edwards will become more of a factor as things progress and Richardson is trying to get into the thick of things too. McCain and Giuliani seem to be receiving the most mention from the GOP, while Gingrich is also being mentioned.
Obama seems capable of giving Clinton a run--especially since some question Clinton's chances if she is their candidate. I don't think Giuliani stands a chance--gun control supporting candidates with a pro-choice stance don't tend to do well with the GOP's core. McCain may not appeal to the far right, but I think he has a better shot. We'll see if age is tossed into the equation though. Romney is another possibility.
So, it's really any one's guess right now. I still believe Obama v. McCain would make for a refreshingly civil campaign. Gingrich v. Clinton could be a little deja vu and quite the battle. We'll have to wait and see what unfolds.
Source: brettdalypolitics.blogspot.com
Obama officials say talks with Iran still possible
Poten & Partners Jun 28 2009 5:01PM GMT
Source: c.moreover.com
Post a Comment