Choices

I've been watching the continuing trainwreck known as "Obamacare", which maybe become better known as the "Unaffordable Health Care Act" played out with new screw-ups coming to light daily. Just recently, we learned that 40% of the "back-end" portion of the site remains to be developed. This is the financial management portion and covers such trivials as providing financial assistance for those unable to afford coverage, which, judging from the news reports, will be just about everybody, and now we're learning not being able to keep your current doctor may be another. To date, few individuals have signed up, and insurance companies are continuing to drop coverage while some employers see this as open season on employee healthcare insurance coverage. President Obama said that "Obamacare" would be his legacy; the centerpiece of his presidency. Well, on that point, he appears right. It won't be long forgotten. Personally, I think we need to take another serious look at single payer coverage.

Meanwhile, the Huffington Post published an article about what lessons the Republican Party could learn from the changes being implemented by Pope Francis. Apparently, the new pope is moving at lightning speed (at least, by Vatican standards), to reel in some of the abuses by the Church of recent, such as the rampant cover-up of pedophilia while reaffirming other standing dogma such as the role of women in the Church. Someone I know posted the article on their Facebook page, which prompted a comment what mistakes the GOP should admit to and how they should be addressed.

My response was brief, and as usual, to the point. I remarked that what hurt the Republican Party, at least nationally, has been its stand on some, if not most of its social issues; it's opposition to decrease dependence on oil and opposition to alternative energy sources; refusal to address term limits, real campaign finance reform; a comprehensive reform of the tax system, more controls on big business and less on small business, and, of course, the gerryrigging of elections through redistricting regulations. Not too surprising, I received a response from (apparently) an establishment type Republican. His comment was polite, which I appreciated, however, he thought that I was comparing "apples and oranges" and thought the GOP didn't need to change it current stance on the above issues, which he didn't think hurt the Republican Party. What needed, he said, was to change was tactics and new ways to change the current ground rules. I think he is, in a way, correct and at the same time, wrong. Allow me to explain.

These issues are key points for the GOP's base. Namely, it's uber-conservative stance on certain social issues such as not recognizing of gay relationships and marriage, Christian prayer in school, pro-life, support for the 2nd Amendment, among others. These are core bedrock issues---non-negotiable---for the GOP rank and file now that the moderates have been all but expunged. The GOP has traditionally been considered the "Capitalistic" Party, and as such, is beholden to business, especially big business and that includes the oil and energy industry. First, the GOP as a whole denies global warming. Secondly, it continues to push for development of oil and gas based energy while cutting environmental restrictions and funding for alternative energy sources. Following along that vein, it sees no incentives for term limits, campaign finance reform (and, in fact, the GOP supported the Supreme Court's "Citizens United" ruling which gave full rights to corporations equivalent to you and I), nor does it have any interest in promoting less restrictions on small businesses while it does for its big corporate donors. Finally, the Republicans (and Democrats for that matter) won't willing forego their stranglehold on the redistricting, which allows both parties, in a twisted sense of bipartisanship, to arrange districts to suit their party, thereby assuring no competitive elections.

Here's the problem for the GOP. Its base is mainly White, well educated, and well-to-do, is ageing fast and getting rapidly smaller. In fact, the largest bloc of voters for both parties, has been the Babyboomers (of which I am one), are hitting retirement age and starting to exit the scene. White males are already a minority. Whites in general will be near on par with the next largest group, Hispanics, in roughly 15 years, followed by Blacks and Asians (Asians are expected to overcome Blacks, at least regionally, in only 20 - 30 years). By age bracket, Millennials (those born between 1980 and 2000), also known as "Generation Y", are increasingly replacing Babyboomers (and, whose numbers, are greater than the Babyboomer population). In addition, women are an increasing political force. They are also more socially liberal.

Taken as a whole, these groups tend to lean Left on social issues, especially the Millennials regardless of gender or race. In particular, they are the primary force behind support for gay marriage. They have the least objection to non-traditional relationship along gender and race lines. They are also firmly convinced of global warming, be it part of a natural cycle, the result of industry or some combination. Therefore, they are strong advocates of green technology (and technology in general). They are also the most "anti-establishment" of all groups. They are the least likely to have any interest in government or public service while having the highest interest in community or civic service. Because they bear the brunt of public debt, inherited by "can-kicking" policies and by student loan debt, they support a total tax overhaul as well as term limits and removing as much social control from government as possible. In short, they distain both political parties and most current government institutions. These same groups are the least religious, especially when it comes to organized religion. Oh, and these were the groups who overwhelmingly supported Obama and has continued to support those seen as socially liberal.

To sum up, the very issues which provides the core for the GOP are also the same issues which will doom it over the next few years as their base continues to shrink (as an aside, the Democrats don't have a lock on these groups either). Therefore, the Republican Party appears to have an interesting choice. Maintain their current positions and attempt to buy time by focusing on tactics and other delaying actions while increasingly losing more elections, or modifying their stance on key issues, especially social issues, which could grow its base over time as its present core continuing to exist from history's stage. This approach would cause short term loses with increased probability of more wins over time. I have no doubt what my choice would be. How about you?

Tech official: Up to 40% of Obamacare work left
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/11/tech-chief-didnt-see-march-obamacare-memo-100058.html

What the GOP Can Learn From Pope Francis
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/patrick-hynes/what-the-gop-can-learn-fr_1_b_4303844.html

Millennials: A Portrait of Generation Next
http://www.pewresearch.org/millennials/

Storming the Barricades

Storming the barricades. You know, that's something which happens somewhere else, maybe a third world nation or someplace trying to break free for a ruthless tyrant. It doesn't even feel right to write the words, "barricades" , and yet that exactly what happen last week. Veterans, those brave men and women, who served our country; who fought, bled, and suffered for our freedoms, denied access to war memorials dedicated by this nation to them, and by extension, to us.

As I'm sure you all know, the government shutdown was all about an attempt by Republicans (specifically we're told, by Tea Partiers) to defeat Obamacare by defunding it. In order to do that, it was reasoned, it was necessary to simply forgo a budget; bring the nation to the financial brink, and the Democrats (or more specifically, Obama) would cave. Easy peasy. Well, not so much.

In the process of teaching Obama and the Democrats a political lesson in hard ball politics, the GOP forgot rule number one: having a backup plan, which generally involves having better PR than your opponent. It all started off with a filibuster by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and his 21 hour filibuster which included a reading from Psalms, a monologue about poker, Ashton Kutcher, and a reading of Dr. Seuss' "Green Eggs and Ham". Nevertheless, it was all downhill out of the gate as Speaker of the House, John Boehner (R-OH and Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell (R-KY) tried every political trick in the book (including trying to look sincere) to gain political traction, but to no avail. While everyone in the polls took a big hit, the Republicans caught the brunt with the lowest polling of either political party at any time, 28%.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, some 800,000 "non-essential" federal employees were furloughed without pay. Government agencies across the board were affected, including a partial closure of the departments of Homeland Security, Energy, Education, and the EPA. But what seemed to catch the public's attention the most was the partial closure of the Department of Interior which closed our national parks and wildlife refuges like the Grand Canyon, Yosemite, and of course, the various memorials in and around Washington.
Perhaps the single most memorable act that came out of this governmental debacle, was when a group of WWII veterans attempted to visit the WWII memorial. The memorial was blocked off---barricaded. These old warriors refused to leave. They just stood there. Silent. Waiting. Finally, one lone Park Officer, set aside the barricades so these heroes could go in (he was later reprimanded, and the memorial not just reclosed, but the barricades were wired shut together). Now, I don't care about your politics, but when it comes to how we treat our veterans, especially these brave souls who we are losing at a rate of 650 per day, that's going too far. That memorial, if none other, should have been left open. What made the closure even more repugnant, was that the White House and Department of Interior, which manages the memorial, knew these veterans, who were part of Honor Flight which provides free transportation of veterans to DC to visit the memorials. Rep Steve Palazzo (R-MS) had made several requests to allow these veterans access; all denied by the way. In the end, however, the veterans were victorious. They had beaten the Nazis; Imperial Japan; the Communist North Koreans, and now they've beaten a federal shutdown (it should be mentioned that other veterans who showed up at other memorial sites such as the Vietnam Memorial, were denied access and the areas remained cordoned off).

Nevertheless, as if to get even, the Obama Administration approved a protest and concert on the National Mall by illegal immigrants, which even featured a speech by House Minority Leader, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). Why did this administration refuse to open parks and memorials for school children and our nation's veterans, but saw fit to allow illegal immigrants access to the National Mall? Am I the only one who sees something wrong with this picture? According to the spokesperson for the National Park Service, Mike Litterst, the illegal immigrants were afforded the same first amendment rights as were the Honor Flight veterans. The rally, entitled "Camino Americano: March for Immigration Reform" was organized by the AFL-CIO and Service Employee International Union (SEIU) along with other pro-amnesty groups. The unions and many businesses having been working together to push for pro-amnesty legislation since this would, on the one hand, increase the size of the workforce and drive down wages and benefits and, on the other hand, hopefully increase union membership and bring badly needed dues into the union's coffers.

First off, these are veterans. Former US servicemen and women who fought for this country and earned a right, not just by birth, but by blood and valor, to be there. Second, the memorial was considered "closed". The veterans entered by force of numbers. Now, these illegal immigrants never earned nor had any such right. The veterans were given no official welcome or escort. There was no official presence of the National Park Service there while the illegal immigrants were allowed full access to the National Mall with available park officers on hand.

In the end, after a 16 day shutdown and bringing the nation to the edge of a financial meltdown, the debt ceiling was raised and the government is funded...for now; Obamacare was untouched. The Supreme Court had previously upheld (improperly I might add) Obamacare as a tax, and it's funded accordingly, along with other fees. The GOP walked away with nothing to show for their efforts except a very angry public. Tens of thousands who rely on the government were threaten with a cut off of their benefits, people like seniors on social security, disabled or retired veterans receiving compensation or retirement, and low income families receiving assistance. The shutdown cost taxpayers approximately $24 billion dollars. Oh, and by the way, since nothing was resolved, we get to do this all over again in January. I'd start stocking up if I were you. It may be a long cold winter.




Number of furloughed workers shrink as shutdown drags on
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/10/09/shutdown-furloughs-return-to-work/2953191/

Here's How Much The Government Shutdown Costs The Economy
http://swampland.time.com/2013/10/17/heres-what-the-government-shutdown-cost-the-economy/

Government shutdown: What's opened, what's closed?
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2013/09/politics/government-shutdown-impact/

Government Shutdown: WWII Vets Say Feds Should Be Ashamed for Closing Their Memorial
http://swampland.time.com/2013/10/02/government-shutdown-ww-ii-vets-say-feds-should-be-ashamed-for-closing-their-memorial/

Obama admin knew about WWII veterans' request and rejected it
http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/01/obama-admin-knew-about-wwii-veterans-request-and-rejected-it/

Immigration rally allowed on Mall despite shutdown
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/10/08/government-shutdown-immigration-rally/2942257/