Dear John and Barack:
Over the next two weeks, if all goes as planned at your conventions, you’ll become the only two people on the planet with a serious shot at the presidency. We’re talking 50/50 odds on becoming leader of the free world.
So far, the campaign has gotten bogged down in issues du jour: gasoline prices, when to get out of Iraq, putting Putin in his place, and the silliness of who’s the bigger celebrity (you both are and you know it).
Don’t get me wrong: These things matter in the short run (well, all but the celebrity tit-for-tat). But the reality is, the specific issues will change while you’re in office. So I’d prefer your take on the bigger picture. I’ve gotten it down to six questions:
1. What will make us more respected in the world, war-making or peace-brokering, and how will you move us in that direction?
2. How will your administration help rebuild our economy with new kinds of jobs for a new kind of world (one based more on advancing ideas, science and technology and less on making stuff)?
3. How will your administration do a better job of educating our citizens so they’re more employable over their lifetimes, and so our nation is more competitive in a global economy?
4. What will your administration do to better protect and preserve people’s health and more affordably treat illness?
5. What will your administration do to help clean up the environment at home and worldwide?
6. What will you do to ensure that the “tyranny of the majority” never trumps individual civil liberties?
Those are my questions. Fellow bloggers: Please weigh in with yours.
Posts
What will you do to ensure that your administration remains adequately ethical, accountable, and transparent to the American people (via Congress mostly) while still making the big behind-closed-door decisions necessary for effective governance?
well, we already know that McCain offers the promise of 4 more years of the same Bushit that has been forced down our throats by the lyin’, cheatin’, corporate-whorin’ folks at Bush/Cheney Inc., so is there really a need for a discussion here? I mean if you want more war-mongering and raping and pillaging of our national treasury by war profiteers and Wall Street/ Big Oil/Big Insurance/Big Money thieves then your paid killer is McSame…but if you want ANY shred of real HOPE for the future then Obama is your the ONLY sane and rational choice! Of course we also know that many Americans famously vote AGAINST their own personal and economic interests because they are too stupid to know when they are being lied to by the Repugnants, and of course the Repigs are ALWAYS trying to cheat by suppressing voters/ not counting votes/ rigging the machines, etc. (it’s what they do, it’s who they are!) because they know it’s the only way they can win…there ain’y enough rich folks or whacko right-wing religious zealots to outvote the rest of us so they HAVE to lie and cheat to win…it’s the only way they know!
Y’know, Joe Mama, I was tempted to remove your post. However, because I’m an advocate of civil liberties, including free speech, I’ll let it stand. In my view, however, civil liberties should be accompanied by civil discourse. It’s name-calling rants like yours that discourage citizens from participating in the democratic process and discourage potential candidates from running for office. That’s our collective loss.
If Joe Mama is a McCain supporter, trying to make Obama fans look like crazed lunatics, he’s doing a good job. If he’s really an Obama supporter, he should be ashamed of himself.
I couldn’t agree more with the six cited “big picture” questions; however, where does health care fall? It has been amazing to me that this issue has fallen a bit to the back burner of late. After having worked for a very large corporation and watched my personal benefit coverage decrease while the costs increased significantly I have to wonder when the time will be when it becomes the job of our government to step in and take control. I have to admit that I am not one to back away from taking a stance on any opinion that I have, whether widely accepted or not, but my mind finds itself at a bit of a cross roads with this issue. Federal government is notoriously poorly organized. As a matter of fact it is hard to have a conversation about government agencies without using the word bureaucracy with such horrible insinuations that there might not exist a less efficient beast. However, even if we acknowledge that government is less than efficient would it not seem a bit more reasonable for our costs to be rationalized, that all children have the opportunity to see a physician, and power to be taken back from large insurers who seem to not have the general public’s interest at heart. I hate to deviate from the topic, but still would like someone to convince me one way or the other.
One fundamental question trumps all others, because without a solid solution to this challenge, little will change in Washington and across our country.
THE QUESTION: How will you build a working majority to actually accomplish your vision and top priorities?
Washington, unfortunately, has become a place where good ideas go to die. Many members of Congress are well-intentioned, dedicated, visionary leaders. But too often, a higher priority has been placed on scoring political points, rather than achieving collective victories for the American people.
To move his agenda forward, our next president must be able to inspire and rally enough support from the citizenry to force Congress to act.
Say what you will about his policies (most of which I personally disagreed with), but Ronald Reagan really was the last president to effectively do this.
To put an end to a do-nothing-Congress, we should be asking ourselves as voters which candidate can most effectively govern, not only by having the best policies, but also being able to build the working majority it will take to actually enact them.
It is so easy for you [candidates] to “tell” us you are going to fix the economy; raise taxes or not; make the abortion problem go away; solve the oil situation; bring the troops home whether we win or not (thus an insult to those who are still giving their all to win); which brings me to just one simple question: “How?” God speed to the candidate who has the answer.
Bravo….but I doubt we will get any answers.
Phyllis’ reply reminds me of something I heard on the radio just the other day. The discussion was about Georgia and the population of secular Muslim’s that live in there and in Turkey and other parts of the world. I was amazed to hear callers make statements such as “I don’t know how those people can send their children, strapped with bombs, to die for a cause.” I can’t quote exactly what followed, but the statements were built to criticize a culture and, en masse, a religion that believes that “acting violently is the most appropriate and culturally backed manner of communication.” I won’t touch the topic of religious stereotyping, that would be too easy, but I do have to say this; while there is certainly an obvious difference between sending a 9 year old into a crowd strapped with dynamite and sending an 18 year old boy into Iraq with a hand grenade; I have to ask myself if we were to remove all of our preconceived notions about what we think we know and remove nationality and religion, what argument for this war would be left and how different are all of our intentions? Further, I have to ask, what are we really winning? My candidate will address this question. Diverting to another topic, I also have to ask what does “the abortion problem” really mean? I am a woman, a mother, and I value my rights (and more importantly, the rights of my daughter). I am also a proponent for sex education, birth control, and certainly options for pregnancy such as adoption. My responsibility as a woman and mother is to ensure that I remain educated about my options and educate my daughter. Further, my responsibility is to keep the value of life and accountability at the forefront of my mind. Having said this, the government that I know and wish for in the future President should never decide to change Rowe versus Wade. Please don’t confuse this to mean that abortion should be a manner of birth control; however it should absolutely remain an option for women. The government should not be allowed to enter my bedroom and tell me who I can and cannot share my bed with (as with gay marriage); likewise, it should not enter my decisions on how I choose to be accountable toward pregnancy.
I have two sets of questions.
Set A is from Science Debate 2008 and is for our presidential candidates. To learn more visit: http://sciencedebate2008.com.
Set B is for Indiana’s gubernatorial candidates and were proposed by Marian College president Dan Elsener. To learn more visit: http://indianasciencedebate2008.blogspot.com/
Set A: Presidential Questions
A1. Innovation. Science and technology have been responsible for half of the growth of the American economy since WWII. But several recent reports question America’s continued leadership in these vital areas. What policies will you support to ensure that America remains the world leader in innovation?
A2. Climate Change. The Earth’s climate is changing and there is concern about the potentially adverse effects of these changes on life on the planet. What is your position on the following measures that have been proposed to address global climate change—a cap-and-trade system, a carbon tax, increased fuel-economy standards, or research? Are there other policies you would support?
A3. Energy. Many policymakers and scientists say energy security and sustainability are major problems facing the United States this century. What policies would you support to meet demand for energy while ensuring an economically and environmentally sustainable future?
A4. Education. A comparison of 15-year-olds in 30 wealthy nations found that average science scores among U.S. students ranked 17th, while average U.S. math scores ranked 24th. What role do you think the federal government should play in preparing K-12 students for the science and technology driven 21st Century?
A5. National Security. Science and technology are at the core of national security like never before. What is your view of how science and technology can best be used to ensure national security and where should we put our focus?
A6. Pandemics and Biosecurity. Some estimates suggest that if H5N1 Avian Flu becomes a pandemic it could kill more than 300 million people. In an era of constant and rapid international travel, what steps should the United States take to protect our population from global pandemics or deliberate biological attacks?
A7. Genetics research. The field of genetics has the potential to improve human health and nutrition, but many people are concerned about the effects of genetic modification both in humans and in agriculture. What is the right policy balance between the benefits of genetic advances and their potential risks?
A8. Stem cells. Stem cell research advocates say it may successfully lead to treatments for many chronic diseases and injuries, saving lives, but opponents argue that using embryos as a source for stem cells destroys human life. What is your position on government regulation and funding of stem cell research?
A9. Ocean Health. Scientists estimate that some 75 percent of the world’s fisheries are in serious decline and habitats around the world like coral reefs are seriously threatened. What steps, if any, should the United States take during your presidency to protect ocean health?
A10. Water. Thirty-nine states expect some level of water shortage over the next decade, and scientific studies suggest that a majority of our water resources are at risk. What policies would you support to meet demand for water resources?
A11. Space. The study of Earth from space can yield important information about climate change; focus on the cosmos can advance our understanding of the universe; and manned space travel can help us inspire new generations of youth to go into science. Can we afford all of them? How would you prioritize space in your administration?
A12. Scientific Integrity. Many government scientists report political interference in their job. Is it acceptable for elected officials to hold back or alter scientific reports if they conflict with their own views, and how will you balance scientific information with politics and personal beliefs in your decision-making?
A13. Research. For many years, Congress has recognized the importance of science and engineering research to realizing our national goals. Given that the next Congress will likely face spending constraints, what priority would you give to investment in basic research in upcoming budgets?
A14. Health. Americans are increasingly concerned with the cost, quality and availability of health care. How do you see science, research and technology contributing to improved health and quality of life?
Set B: Indiana Gubernatorial Questions
B1) How can Indiana best prepare our
students to excel in math, science,
engineering, and technology fields?
B2) How might our government mobilize
businesses, community leaders, the large
universities, and the 31 independent
colleges and universities in Indiana to
address the math and science
education crisis?
B3) How can we position Indiana to be a
true science and technology leader?
I would like to see the candidates address these questions in their debates.