Kerry's Mandate
Matt Welch closed out reason's Democratic Convention Blog with a nice post about Presidential hopeful John Kerry's potential mandate. The post, which I copied in extended comments, included some troubling questions unanswered and the best reason I've seen to vote for Kerry.
There are some policy issues that the Democratic Converntion did not address. I have reformatted Mr. Welch's words here:
- Should America help democratize the Middle East, and if so, how?
- What happens when the Taliban continues to increase strength in Afghanistan and Pakistan?
- How does "no blood for oil" translate into dealing with Iran and North Korea?
- Free Trade or Fair Trade?
- Is it cool to lock up hundreds of thousands of disproportionately poor and non-white Americans for trivial drug possession?
- Should Affirmative Action be mended, ended, or extended?
- Is the federal government really going to be there "winter, spring, summer or fall," or can the private sector pitch in for a few weeks here and there?
That these questions were not addressed indicates that our system of government has critical flaws. I maintain that it is in need of fundamental reform.
Mr. Welch does have me thinking about voting for Kerry. He believes that if Kerry wins, "the hot political story in 2006 and 2008 will be about how the governing coalition is in disarray while the Republicans are newly unified against the haughty, chin-secreting liberal." Further, "if John Kerry presides over a divided government, backed by a bickering party that doesn't have George Bush to kick around anymore, then we will see endless new variations on the concept of "gridlock." "
What Mr. Welch largely ignores in this post is the threat from putatively Islamic terrorists. Bush Senior upset conservatives and gave way to Bill Clinton. President Clinton habitually took the easier, softer path; withdrawing from Somalia in 1993, blowing up $100 tents with $10,000,000 missles, and watching inspectors leave Baghdad. I would expect President Kerry to be just as soft on terrorists, paving the way for another attack.
President Clinton took power in the extended wake of the Reagan Revolution. Hillary Care's overreach in 1993 lead to the Gingrich Revolution in 1994. With this revolution came the Contract With America, a novel concept that politicians actually make and keep concrete promises. They also made public votes on discharge petitions, making it more difficult for political leadership to stifle popular reforms. In late 1995, the maverick members of the House of Representatives shut down government in an attempt to reign in government spending. President Clinton chose to have sex (as some would define it) instead of working with the our nation's elected legislature. The reformers got beat down and the reformist zeal has since waned.
So if Kerry got elected, could we expect another Contract with America? Would we be electing as Vice President another charismatic politician who would smile for the camera and undercut real reform? And, of course, would we be ceding the War on Terror?
Alan on 07.31.04 @ 03:29 PM CT [more..]