This is the week when everyone in Washington, and even some of us in the rest of the country, become aspiring State of the Union speech writers. The papers are full of speculation about what the president will say and even more advice about what he should say.
The conventional consensus, 36 hours out, is that he will talk about jobs. Now there is a safe bet. Of course he will talk about jobs. We still have over nine percent unemployment, large corporate cash reserves and little expansion investment, and workers who are giving up the search. He will talk about the need for investment in education and training, in new technologies, in less regulation for job-creating small businesses, and how we must become competitive in innovation. Democrats will cheer. Republicans will sit on their hands, and in interviews afterwards criticize him for not cutting more spending--in the abstract.
Beyond the predictable, however, a few of us would like to hear something else. A reminder of the principles upon which our nation was founded. The ideals of self-reliance, but also of community. Beneath the strains of more government-less government, more spending-less spending, leave-me-alone versus the commonwealth lies the deeper question: what kind of society do we want?
The president alone can authoritatively answer that question, at least based on his own perspective. He can suggest that the best way to liberate the energies of the individual is to create a nation that cares about the individual. The best way to let people stand on their own two feet is to help create an economic platform to stand on. The best way to preserve freedom and liberty is for all of us -- together -- to build a society in which everyone can share and no one is left behind. The best way up is on a ladder that all can climb.
Having heard all the old arguments before, some of my generation have moved beyond the old quarrels and the stale rhetoric and the worn out ideological disputes. We want to return to the principles and ideals which make our nation unique. And by that return, we believe that we can leave the debris of the past behind and all move forward together.
To comment, please visit Senator Hart's blog at: http://www.mattersofprinciple.com/?p=610
Follow Gary Hart on Twitter: www.twitter.com/gary__hart
Let's talk about needs, instead. What are some basic needs, that everyone has? Well, for starters, food, water, and shelter, and after that, how about an annual doctor's visit to make sure you aren't falling apart at the seams? Beyond that, how about a chance to earn some 'scratch' so you can support yourself? Let's see, what else do you NEED, in life. Well, lots of people consider fresh water in abundance to be a 'right', as well as safe streets to walk down where criminals don't go speeding and firing indiscriminately at passerby as in times of old. Some would say that education is a 'need', that people need opportunities to gain knowledge and skills with which to better themselves and their personal circumstances.
And, maybe by teaching people to meet their own needs, and making it possible to the best of human ability for them to have the opportunity to do so, we will ultimately also then have a better society, which is something I think everyone wants.
But, one thing we do NOT need is politicians and other high rollers artificially inflating prices and squeezing the public for every penny they've got, and then indebting unborn generations to pay for what THEY want, or think they need, or to finally satisfy the incessant squawking of some special interest group.
Wants vs. needs. What IS the difference, there, and are our politicians smart enough to discern between the two?
Politicians sometimes squeeze the public for every penny they've got. Now is definitely NOT one of them (compare current tax rates with the rates in place when the US was booming for decades, look at the vote to extend the tax cuts for the filty...rich).
They do tend to indebt future generations. Both Repugs and Demos are susceptible to this disease.
Finally, yes, they do respond to one "special interest group" - their constituents. They will do anything (eat their grandma) to get re-elected. That is one saving grace, actually.
Finally, are our politicians smart enough to discern between wants and needs? They don't care (see comment above about grandma).
As in one job, Obama's reelection. He will say anything to get reelected, and he will say anything.
you know, the guy from the Bibel.
And that will take public campaign financing.
We have lost an ability to hold these two visions of the US in tandem and are now splitting into non functional opposites.
Diversity, religion, race, sex, education, east, west, Latino, Swede are second to, or should be second to American. If, you are an American and know that the other fellow is also first an American then you can share in the diversity. If you push the difference and have no common ground you are asked what kind of society should we have and the answer is splintered because of no strong national belief.
I understand that this view flies in the face of both parties need to separate and thus keep each group in their camp. However the American party only asks that you agree that being American is most important because it then allows your diversity. My society is a proud, strong one that neighbor helps each other because they know both are American. Simplistic, true, but complex is what Washington thrives on. My society starts with I am an American! then it allows for differences because I know you have my back, Americas back when we are needed.
Ever since the nation was founded people were divided, and profoundly - virginian or carolinan, pro-slave or anti-slave, religion, race (dutch, english, scottish, irish, they're all white but back then people cared!), and politics, have all been second to being American by many people, to the point where our first federal government _literally failed_ because of holding our local identities above our national one.
America is a nation of people who nag, complain, and argue with each other incessantly, and we always have been. _That_ is what unifies us, and what should be guiding our continual cluster, uh, bang of a government.
What's happening instead is people abusing their power to craft policy without the voice of the people meaningfully involved, or worse, outright buying out of that voice through scam political advertising or partisan media. That's given us a nation more unified, not less, but being unified about being corrupt doesn't make things better.
We are not a collective.
We are individuals. When it works, we are Independent Individual who join together for Interdependent goals.
More often that not, thanks to the Democratic Party, we are a mass of Dependent Individuals demanding more stuff from others.