Party Pressure: Will it cause Government to Break?

A fear from the beginning, political parties, though they seem inevitable seem to put excess pressure and obstacles into the political system. As seen in Congress, especially recently with the climate change bill failure, the tension between political parties seems to prevent legislation that is actually in the interest of the public (not just Democrats or Republicans) to be passed. We all breathe the same air, walk the same ground, drink the same water and to see a bill fail that would take steps to protect these resources all humans take advantage of because the GOP is adamant to prevent any Democrat favored legislation to be passed is upsetting.

It seems as though we as a nation have forgotten what Government’s role as a whole is and party ties are stronger than seeing the big picture. Government is not supposed to be about making alliances and trying to take power from others. It is there to serve the people. However this begs the question is the public, of which Government is supposed to come from, doing its job in making sure that their best interest, is being served. Should there have been more mobilization from voters concerning the climate change bill? Would this have made a difference? Maybe, maybe not, but shouldn’t we have tried.

Furthermore, every day I feel more and more pressure, to choose a side, to tie myself to one party or another. I am not sure where this pressure is coming from, whether it is reading articles that are clearly slanted in one direction or from hearing about legislation being delayed because of a lack of compromise, or even from learning that Republican representatives from my own state of Texas are up in arms to fight the passed bill of Healthcare Reform that was generated by the Democrats. I feel as though if I am feeling this pressure and I am barely involved, how those directly involved in government must feel the extreme pressure to stay loyal to his or her party of choice in all situation, regardless if staying loyal means forgetting the public’s best interest (as seen with the failure of the climate change bill). This is worrisome, because as it is probable the public is not as well informed to see how these party ties are creating more problems than they are solving and see the loyalty of Congressman as an admirable quality rather than a hindrance.

As I see it, the United States Government could stand to see a few more moderates join the act. This would allow for more compromises to be made and more people to bridge the gap and allow legislation to actually be passed that would benefit the nation as a whole. It is just going to be a matter of time for us to realize what is good for us and make a stand. But, is it going to be too late?

Mother Nature Forces Involvemnet

In his article, “We’re Gonna Be Sorry,” New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman criticizes Senate Democrats for choosing to “…[abandon] the effort to pass an energy/climate bill that would begin to cap greenhouse gases that cause global warming and promote renewable energy that could diminish our addiction to oil.” Seeing as though Mr. Friedman has served as a economic correspondent in Washington and chief White House correspondent for the New York Times he is probably well informed about how Congress works and apt to criticize as well. Friedman points out that he could blame Republicans for not voting for the bill or hesitant Democrats or even President Obama, but he point out when it comes down to it “…the public, confused and stressed by the last two years, never got mobilized to press for this legislation.” He suggests that it was the public who were the ones who did not use the system to promote legislation that is in the public’s interest.

This is upsetting because it shows where the public is failing. The public is given the right to petition for legislation through multiple ways and still did not mobilize for this bill. Friedman points out that this is especially upsetting because the public is messing with “Mother Nature” who, according to Friedman, “Mother Nature is going to do whatever chemistry, biology and physics dictate.” Global warming is happening whether we want it to or not and it is dangerous for us as the public to just watch and let political games dictate whether or not legislation gets passed to help protect the earth we all live in. This is the time, where information and communication is readily available and easy to use, the public should be figuring out what is in their best interest and doing what they can to protect it. To put it simply, the failure for this watered down energy bill to pass is a wake up call for the nation to get involved in the democracy the Framers built or else we will regret it.

Is the Economy the Bottom Line?

On Sunday July 18, 2010, in the New York Times published article “The Pundit Delusion,” columnist and current Economics and International Affairs professor at Princeton University, Paul Krugman suggests that the ‘… “Obama paradox” — the supposedly mysterious disconnect between the president’s achievements and his numbers…’ is based on the health of the nation’s economy. Well versed in the subject of Economics, Krugman supports his claim by showing the evidence of a poll conducted in 1996.

“In 1996 voters were asked whether the deficit had gone up or down under Bill Clinton. It had, in fact, plunged — but a plurality of voters, and a majority of Republicans, said that it had risen.”

Krugman demonstrates that even though during this time Democrats had actually reduced the national deficit, when people did not experience economic improvements in their own lives they were more likely to blame those in office. Krugman goes on to make the point that citizens facing economic troubles in their own lives are more likely to blame those currently in charge than someone who is not. Even though those currently in office are not the cause or only part of the problem, it is what citizens perceive and it is the citizens’ perceptions of what is going on in government that dictate approval ratings. Then, Krugman suggests that if perception is key for approval, maybe the Obama Administration was too concerned about, “…how its policies would play in the news rather than on their actual impact on the economy.” The author points out how this concern could ultimately ruin chances for Obama’s re-election and how people “…will say that it was because Mr. Obama was too liberal — when his real mistake was doing too little to create jobs.”

I personally agree with Krugman’s logic in his argument. When people do not experience immediate change in their personal lives and economy when legislation is passed, people become hesitant to believe that such legislation will ever change anything. As much trust as one can have in this nation’s government, when still facing economic and job problems when promised change is disheartening and can cause one to look for someone to blame. Usually, it is then easiest to blame those who hold power, because it is with their power they should have changed things right?

However, even though Krugman suggests that the economy is the top dictator of approval ratings, isn’t it in the citizen’s best interest to become more informed about legislation to see how this apparent success might or might not affect his or her personal future? Then, his or her approval would be based on that rather than making the executive the scapegoat for the whole situation. But, as nice as this would be, when we are currently in a state as a nation where not all voters are informed even for a presidential election, is there any motivation to be informed for a simple poll? Politicians, at the moment, are better off taking the risk riding the economy’s waves of ups and downs rather than relying on informed voters to make decisions based on the facts.

One Regulator that didn't make the Cut

On Monday July 12, 2010 The New York Times published the article “Financial Bill to Close Regulator of Fading Industry.” The article describes, that despite the call for more regulation within the banking and market systems within the financial reform bill, “…Democrats hope to send the president this week is the directive to dismember and close the Office of Thrift Supervision.” This is interesting because lack of oversight was part of the cause of both the 1980 and 2008 financial crises and one would think a regulation agency would be safe from closing during the current financial reform. The article explains this anomaly with the suggestion that “…the agency is being buried with its industry.” The suggestion is then explained with describing that it was because of this office’s lack of regulation and not doing their job that caused institutions such as Washington Mutual, IndyMac and Countrywide Financial to fail. Furthermore, such savings and loan institutions are now being integrated into major banking corporations. Therefore, it is quite logical that Congress would attempt to close the Office of Thrift Supervision because it did not do its job and is becoming inert. This article is valuable to the American public because it describes some of the inner workings of Congress regarding the financial reform. It reveals logical steps that are trying to be taken to correct the financial crisis of 2008, something that is still affecting most Americans. Reading more similar articles is a step the American public should take to become a nation of more informed voters.