All about ideas…

Would a Divided Government, At This Time, Resolve Our Challenges?

with 2 comments

Sarah Palin - Jim DeMint, TEA Party leadersUnder normal economic conditions, I would agree that a divided Congress works best for the country as it modifies the extremes of both parties, thereby guaranteeing policies that work best of the populace and for business. However, we are not in normal economic conditions. Yes, the country needs a Congress in which the extremes of the majority is moderated by the minority. But right now, it appears that partisan politics is playing a larger role than is good for the country.

As a result of our “global competition deficit” which has been fostered by both parties,

-we have a tax system that requires a major overhaul to foster increased global competitiveness;

-a financial system that is still out of control and fails to understand its role in society and business;

– a health care system, regardless of the new ACA, that still eats up 17% of GDP, hampering business;

-$500 Billion/yr in tax payer subsidies to legacy highly profitable corporations and industry sectors at the expense of new businesses;

-a continuing decline of the manufacturing sector within the US which prohibits non-college graduates from obtaining jobs and participating in the growth of the economy;

-a decline in infrastructure that is not only physically dangerous but also greatly reduces global business competitiveness;

-an educational system that has been in decline (the US ranks lower than Kurdistan and something like 11th in innovation and R&D);

-an inequality of income between the top 1% and the vast majority of the middle class that makes the conditions prior to the French Revolution appear on par with now;

– and an inability to foster new businesses to meet the needs of the 21st Century and global climate change.

Gridlock will not solve these problems. Two years of Congress playing “Is it Constitutional?” or not will not put the American people back to work, increase tax revenues, rebuild the middle class, or solve our fiscal problems or global competitiveness. What most probably will occur, as a result of all the ideologically-speaking odd TEA party candidates being voted into office, is an accelerated stagnation of the economy and loss of global competition.

If Republican had put forth serious minded candidates, rather than ideological extremes, then I would have greater confidence in a divided government as a divided government often improves policy. In this particular case, I do not have that confidence, regardless of whether or not Obama wins in 2012…because Obama winning in 2012 is the least of my concerns.

My concern is our nation and our people in a world in which global competition can make or break an economy. I do not see, at present, Republicans being serious about this threat to our national economy.


Written by Valerie Curl

October 17, 2010 at 9:46 AM

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Valerie,
    Although I disagree, I enjoyed your post. This is a courtesy comment, just to let you know that I linked, excerpted, and commented on your post in my latest compilation of divided government writing.

    To close the loop, I’ll also paraphrase my comments here –

    Your perspective is the mirror image of libertarians, independents and limited government conservatives rationalizing a decision to continue to support Republicans in 2006 despite the big spending, big government, big deficit policies of Republican One Party Rule under George Bush.

    The rationalization then, was that Democrats were not sufficiently serious about security and the terrorist threat to our country to be trusted with a share of power. That was an equally nonsensical argument to the one you are making here. It speaks more to the partisan prejudice of the one making the argument than any real rationale for supporting one party or the other.

    This also caught my attention:

    “Two years of Congress playing “Is it Constitutional?” or not will not put the American people back to work, increase tax revenues, rebuild the middle class, or solve our fiscal problems or global competitiveness.”

    I have not seen this articulated quite like this before, but it is enlightening. I suspect this is an accurate reflection of how many on the left view the Constitution – as an important document, but one that shouldn’t get in the way of an enlightened leadership solving the big social and economic problems facing the country.

    Again this is similar to those on the right who consider the Constitution an important document, but one that shouldn’t get in the way of strong enlightened leadership defending and protecting our country from foreign threats and terrorism. Which all goes to reinforce why neither party can be trusted will all the keys to power. Ever. Voters should never let it happen under any circumstances. We need the left to protect our civil liberties from the right. We need the right to protect our economic liberties from the left. Neither of them are very good at it, but you take what you can get.


    October 18, 2010 at 9:54 AM

  2. Thanks!

    san jose chiropractor

    November 14, 2010 at 9:41 AM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: