President Obama – Return to “Hope and Change”

Like most of the folks who voted for then-Senator Obama to become president four years ago, I was sold on the promise of “hope and change.” While I have been politically aware and involved since my college days, I rarely had found a candidate who I could believe in and support like Barack Obama. He talked about bringing a change to government that would be more sensitive to the needs of the poor, and would move past the liberal-conservative debate. However, once in office faced with a huge financial crisis and surrounded by a group of former and present Wall Street bankers and financiers, Obama made some moves that both Democrats and Republicans supported (though now the latter disavow any part in it) to prop up the “banks too big to fail” while the gap between the haves and have-nots grew even widers. Along the way he proposed a revamped health care system, supported gay marriage, provided an avenue for Dream-ers to become legal residents, provided money for projects rebuilding infrastructure and sought to address the sagging public school system. While I have not always support the ways he went about these things, at least they have been on his radar.

Now that the Republicans have solidified their presidential candidate team with Romney and Ryan, there is no question that they have decided on a course of action that will benefit the wealthy and the corporations, deprive basic needs for the poor and indigent, remove regulations on banks and business, return to the flawed policy of primarily supporting carbon-based fuels, and generally run a government that will benefit the few at the expense of the many. Over the last four years, the Republican leadership under pressure from the Tea Party and big money have taken a no-compromise approach to government simply feeding the polarization that was there before 2008. In contrast the Democrats under Obama have sought to find a “middle ground” – either out of a commitment to consensus government or just plain spinelessness – I have never been really clear.

Well, Mr. President, its time to return to hope and change. There are many of us who still embrace your vision of a more inclusive, more just, more compassionate America. The issue for us is not more or less government, but what kind of government: a government that recognizes that poor people are citizens too, that wealthy people need to pay their fair share, that quality education and health care should be a right not a privilege, and that while business is an important part of our economy, government is more than simply about serving the desires of business at the expense of the general population. In a sense Mr. President, we want to hold you to your promises and to the vision that you presented four years ago.

In that way we don’t want you to spend your ad time and campaigning Romney/Ryan bashing, but rather presenting a vision of what you would and could do if given a second term.  Every week I get phone calls, emails and junk mail from the Democrats bashing the opposition; I’m sorry but that’s not what motivates me. Psychologists tell us that fear and anger are short term motivators, but hope and love last over a long time. The change needed to transform this country is long term, longer than your next 4 year term.  We are in a struggle for the future and soul of the country; more than that millions of lives are at stake when we talk about government initiatives in healthcare, poverty reduction, education and the like.

Like Reinhold Neibuhr I recognize that the work of government involves compromise and struggle, and that what government achieves will fall short of perfection. But like contemporary prophets such as Martin Luther King, and the Anabaptist peacemakers thru the centuries, I believe the role of people of faith is to call government, society and culture to a higher standard, even when I recognize it will fall short of reaching that standard. Mr. President, when you spoke of hope and change you pointed us to that higher ideal. I support your original vision – please return and you will have my active support. Continue to run negative ads and you will have my vote, but not much more.

The New Bottom Line

Now that Governor Romney has picked Rep. Paul Ryan as his VP running mate for November's election, the Republicans have made very clear that they are not on the side of restoring social services or redistributing wealth, but rather to serve the greed of the corporations, big banks, and the wealthy 1%. This video clearly lays out the reasons for the disparities and points in the direction of a movement that must occur. I encourage you to take the seven minutes it takes to watch this video, and consider how you might get involve in establishing a "new bottom line.

A Lament for My Republican Friends

In recent weeks, I have had this recurring thought: “Boy, sometimes it must suck to be a Republican.” No one reading this blog on even a sporadic basis would mistake me for a Republican, but some of my friends and perhaps half of my family are. I grew up with parents who were and still are staunch and lifelong Republicans. I can honestly say some of my best friends are Republicans. And in a strange way I feel for them these days.

So what has led to this unconventional political empathy?

Well, the ink hadn’t dried on the Supreme Court’s decision upholding the constitutionality of The Affordable Health Care Act, and Republicans were eviscerating their (now former) hero Justice Roberts for voting with the majority, and proclaiming that one of their main arguing points in the upcoming elections will be dismantling what they derisively call “Obamacare.” I had just returned from Scotland, where everyone has access to free health care (and I might add free college tuition), and thought “how can you be against providing for basic health needs?" They claim we would have to pay a “tax” (their term), and yet if you read the fine print according the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, only 1.2% of the wealthiest Americans would pay the extra fee. So how can people live telling this lie, so that they can’t be against investing in people’s health? What kind of twisted logic does one have to live with in that state?

Republicans say they are for balanced budgets in state and federal governments (which sounds reasonable), but in such an unbalanced way. For example, the Republican-controlled Pennsylvania legislature just passed this year’s budget, and two numbers jumped out at me. The first was $150 million cut from the budget eliminating the “General Assistance Program”, a minimal cash assistance program for the poorest of the poor. The second number was $300 million in tax cuts for the businesses of the state, especially the  cash-rich gas companies drilling in the Marcellus Shelf region. $150 million taken from the poor, while $300 for the corporations – couldn’t we have balanced that out a bit to keep the minimal stipend for the poor and only give the corporations $150 million in tax breaks? Of course then we would have to look at other cuts in public education, health care (there it is again) and basic social services.

Then there is poor Mitt Romney, who says he left Bain Capital in 1999, and yet all the documents say he was in charge until 2002. Apparently in those three years Bain made some decisions that shipped a lot of jobs overseas, which doesn’t look for a guy who says he is an expert at creating jobs. However, I don’t really think it matters because whether he left in 1999 or 2002, I think it’s clear that Romney made his millions making decisions that made lots of money for investors, often at the cost of workers either here or overseas. While the media focuses on the back and forth between Pres. Obama and Candidate Romney on who is the bigger liar, the point is that it was high financiers like Romney and his friends who drove the economy to its current state of collapse, and whether its Goldman Sachs or Morgan Chase or Barclays, the pattern is the same, the leaders made those decisions knowing (1) they would or could hurt the regular investor, while (2) making themselves a whole lot of cash. I must say these guys are really adept at trying to cloud the issue, but the “bottom line” (their favorite phrase) is that they knowingly invested in ways that would benefit themselves, regardless of the cost to others. Those are Mitt’s people, that’s what they do, and he has profited by it, regardless of when he left Bain.

Then there are the other Republican positions on issues that cause me to shake my head, like being against allowing kids brought to this country at a young age and who grew up here to have a pathway to citizenship by way of the Dream Act. Or denying gay couples the right to get married legally. Or dismantling public school systems by defunding them and then blaming the teachers for doing a lackluster job, when in fact time and again it has been shown when schools have adequate resources, up to date materials, and small class sizes the overwhelming majority of kids can succeed. Then there is the fact that Republicans are in the pocket of the National Rifle Association, who oppose any and all gun buying restrictions, when other developed nations who have such restrictions are much safer from gun-related violence, and their hunters still get to go out and shoot. All of these Republican positions seem either ludicrous or just plain inhumane.

Now I know there are arguments for all of these and other Republican positions. However when I explore their views I find they are either logically inconsistent or just plain mean-spirited. My Republican friends and family members are very intelligent, kind and generous people, which is why I feel for them. Now I am sure they must wonder how I can support Obama, which I will say I am lukewarm at best, but only because he has not lived up to his promise. I would have had him go much further on these and other issues than he has gone. And I think the Democrats on the whole have been spineless at times. So feel for me if you will, but my heart goes out to Republicans. How do some of them live with themselves? How transparently greedy and callous does one have to be before he or she looks in the mirror and wonders what you have become?

That’s why I wonder how it must feel to be a Republican; if I were one of them, I would get rid of the mirror, because I wouldn’t want to face myself.

The Don't Ask, Don't Tell Party

The Republicans announced that sometime soon they will come out with their legislative agenda for the coming legislative term. I, along with a lot of other people, have come to refer to the Republicans as the “Party of NO” because up to now their strategy has been to filibuster and block any legislation, great or small, that is proposed by the Obama administration. If the president is for it, they’re “agin it.” Their most recent victories were to block debate on the Dream Act (a bill that would legalize children of undocumented immigrants who were brought to this country at a young age and have spent virtually their whole life in the US), and the army’s policy of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" (which would allow gays and lesbians in the military to be open about their sexuality and still serve in the military). Now granted both bills were tacked on to a military expenditure bill, which unfortunately was the only way proponents thought they could get debates on these issues. However, it is dreadfully sad that two bills deserving a hearing were denied even the possibility of debate.

Based on these latest ploys I have changed my designation of the Republicans from “The Party of No” to the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Party” because their agenda and strategy has been to engage in a high level politics of denial. The reality of undocumented immigrant children and gays and lesbians serving in the military are NOT the figments of someone’s imagination, they are real people undergoing real suffering because of our legislators’ inability and unwillingness to face and deal with that reality. Apparently Republicans (and some Democrats) believe that as long as they don’t ask about some of the grave issues facing people in our nation, they won’t have to do anything about those issues. They are not only “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” on the gays and children of immigrants, but on a whole host of other issues as well.

They are “don’t ask, don’t tell” on health care, as they want to repeal the health care reform bill that was passed a year ago. Just don’t tell them that the 40,000 uninsured Americans that existed when the bill has passed has now reportedly risen to 50,000. They scream about Medicare and higher health care premiums for a relative few, while 50,000 people go with no health insurance at all. They aren’t  asking and don’t want you tell them.

They are “don’t ask don’t tell” when it comes immigration. Don’t ask them to seriously consider why people are coming over the border because they might have to look at U.S. corporations that are exploiting the workers south of the border. Don’t’ ask the U.S. Chamber of Commerce who up until recently were for immigration reform because they saw the undocumented workers as a ready supply of cheap labor. Don’t ask them to compute how much money working immigrants give back to this country in terms of taxes and social security , the benefits of which they will not receive. They don’t want to face those facts. They aren’t  asking and don’t want you tell them.

They are "don’t ask don’t tell" on climate change. Some don’t even think there is such a thing as global warming. So don’t’ ask them to look at the scientific data on the effects of global warming and the need for a radical reversal of our use of oil based products and coal based fuel to feed our carbon rich lifestyles. They don’t ask why oil companies get government subsidies while companies trying to develop alternative green  energy sources must scrape with relatively little. They don’t ask the oil companies to pay their fair share instead of going off with record profits year after year, quarter after quarter. They aren’t  asking and don’t want you tell them.

They are  "don’t ask, don’t tell" on taxes too. They don’t want to hear about repealing the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. They scream about how it will hurt small business persons (when in fact only three percent of all small businesses fall into this category). If they really cared about people paying their fair share, they could make changes in the law for the small business people. But no, they want to protect their wealthy friends because their wealthy friends fund their campaigns. (In this too I must say Democrats are no better than Republicans).

They don’t’ ask what must be done to hold banks accountable. They don’t ask about addressing the serious problems in public education. They don’t’ ask about the terrible waste of life and resources spent in meaningless wars overseas. They don’t’ ask about REALITY, but rather choose to operate in the politics of denial.

And the truly sad thing, is that we let them get away with these lies. In some cases we even support them because it personally benefits us, and we fail to ask the bigger questions about where this politics of denial is taking us as a people and as a global community.

When I watch what goes on in the House and the Senate, I wonder if the Republicans (and some Democrats) are really that blind that they don’t see the needs around them, or are they so callous they just don’t care. I am of the mind to tell them they are both blind and callous; but then they weren’t asking me, were they.

When Did Amnesty Become A Dirty Word

The word "amnesty" appears to have become as bad a word in the Republican lexicon as the word "liberal." Judging from the New Hampshire debate on January 5, none of the Republicans wanted to have the word "amnesty" stuck to them. When we get to the election, you can bet whoever is the Republican candidate will try to defame the Democratic challenger by calling him/her a "liberal" who believes in "amnesty" for illegal immigrants.

Republicans, particularly Mitt Romney, have made illegal immigration a primary issue in the campaign, and yet their solutions to the problem are completely out of touch with reality. I went to all the websites for the major Republican and Democratic candidates to see their proposed solutions for addressing the issue of illegal immigration. What I found was quite revealing and troubling.

The Republican candidates have generally framed the issue in terms of law and order, and anti-terrorism. For instance, Romney’s website says that "[w]e must secure the border, implement an enforceable employer verification system, punish sanctuary cities and reject amnesty if we are to restore Americans’ faith in the rule of law." [All italics are mine.] Huckabee’s statement adds, "immigration is not only an economic issue, but also a national security issue." Giuliani expresses the same sentiment when he says we need to "protect our citizens by controlling America’s borders." Fred Thompson uses much the same language. The only Republican dissenter is John McCain (I will come back to him).

By listening to the Republicans one would think that these 12 million undocumented immigrants are running roughshod over our communities, vandalizing city streets and terrorizing mothers and their children. While technically they are breaking the law, the immigrants are the ones who live in fear and are exploited because of it. The overwhelming majority are not terrorists or criminals, but humble law-abiding citizens seeking to eke out a living for themselves and their families back home. Because of their illegal status, they are easy targets for coercion and manipulation by unscrupulous employers. But the Republicans would have us believe otherwise.

The Democratic candidates frame the issue quite differently. All four of the major candidates (Obama, Clinton, Edwards and Richardson) start by acknowledging the current immigration system is broken and dysfunctional. Second, they affirm the historic American tradition of supporting the family, and seek to preserve immigrant family integrity. Third, they talk about creating a pathway to citizenship for million illegal immigrants. Finally, they talk about working with foreign governments, particularly in Latin America, to help strengthen their economies. While they acknowledge that a dimension of the issue is border security, this is not their major focus. I think Bill Richardson sums up the Democratic position when he says:

"Building a fence will not increase security, just as attempting to deport 12 million illegal immigrants is not feasible or reasonable. I believe a realistic immigration reform plan must address the problem from all sides -- securing the border, penalizing employers for knowingly hiring illegal workers, offering a tough but reasonable path to legalization, engaging Mexico in the reform process, and improving our current immigration quota system."

On this issue John McCain is more of a Democrat than a Republican. While acknowledging the border security issue, McCain goes on to give a realistic assessment. He says we must recognize...
- the importance of building strong allies in Mexico and Latin America
- the importance of pro-growth policies
- the importance of a flexible labor market
- the importance of assimilation of our immigrant population.

Then like the Democrats he advocates a pathway to citizenship, and for that he is branded with the scarlet letter “A” for Amnesty.

The Republican (minus McCain) position on immigration reminds me of the Know-Nothing Party of the 1850’s who opposed all Irish and Italian immigrants, and whose solution to the slavery issue was to ship all blacks back to Africa. Their philosophy was that the U.S. should remain an Anglo-Saxon country (while conveniently ignoring the fact that the European invaders had stolen the land from its Native American inhabitants). The Know-Nothing party was a last gasp before a dramatic change occurred in the U.S. culture, starting with the emancipation and enfranchisement of the slaves and then continuing with the mass immigration of the late 1800’s and early 1900’s. Today, we are on the verge of as significant a change in U.S. culture. The notion of America as the "melting pot" where all peoples leave their former culture and to take on an "American" identity is going by the board. We are now in a global society where the fastest selling cars in the U.S. are made by Toyota and where most of what we buy and use is not produced here. Our telephone and consumer service centers are located in India, and telemarketers call us from anywhere in the world. We are at a point where, as sociologist Ronald Takaki says, we must look at our society through a "different mirror," a multicultural, pluralistic mirror.

The illegal immigration issue is a sign and a symptom of the change that has taken place in our society and our world. Except for McCain, the Republicans don’t seem to have a clue that the ground is shifting under their feet. The Republican emperor has no clothes.

As I have written before, in my view the immigration issue is a direct result of the NAFTA agreements of the early 1990’s. As long as capital can flow freely across borders, it only makes sense that labor be given the same privilege. Illegal or not, the 12 million undocumented workers are part of a major shift taking place in our world and in American society. So if that means I must wear the scarlet letter “A,” that’s okay; most people already think I’m a liberal as it is.