10 Things To Consider In The Voting Booth

This is an opinion piece written in Poltical Affairs magazine by Norman Markowitz.

1. The world is quite likely on the brink of a global depression. “Free market” economic policies are the key to understanding this crisis. Barack Obama has rejected these policies. John McCain now blames individuals, greedy Wall Street executives, even Bush, to hide his complicity and support for these policies, while offering the same economic policies Bush pushed for the eight years. We are early in the crisis. Electing Obama can be like electing Franklin Roosevelt in 1930, not 1932. Electing McCain will be like electing Herbert Hoover in 1930, not 1928, something that no rational electorate would do.

2. Barack Obama has shown modern leadership ability. He works collectively, makes decisions carefully, establishes broad policy outlines and then seeks specific policy solutions that fit the outline and changing conditions. John McCain is impulsive and reckless, prone to make and then reverse snap judgments, lacking either a broad policy outline or specific policies that are consistent with that outline.

3. Barack Obama has experience working with trade unions, urban community organizations, and metropolitan business elites to get things done. John McCain is a Senator and former Congressman from Arizona, an anti-union shop “right to work” state. McCain was chosen by and has represented the Arizona elites, the “right to work” business executives, real estate developers, and bankers from the beginning of his political career. He has no record of working with and supporting the interests of the trade union movement, the large Latino population, or the Native American population of his state

4. Barack Obama has already shown his leadership ability by choosing Joe Biden, a Senator with extensive experience, especially on foreign policy matters, who complements Obama’s abilities, a serious heir apparent to the presidency should that become necessary. McCain has chosen Gov. Sarah Palin not to complement his candidacy or be a realistic heir apparent for the presidency but on the hunch that she would get him female votes and solidify the support of religious right Republicans. Given insurance company actuarial statistics, the chances of Palin succeeding to the presidency through the death of the 72-year old McCain are much greater than the chances of Biden succeeding to the presidency by the death of the 47-year old Obama. What a Palin presidency would mean to the US and the world deserves to be a consideration for voters, even if it obviously hasn’t been a consideration for McCain.
5. Barack Obama opposed the Iraq War and occupation as an Illinois State Senator even before Bush launched it and has continued as a US Senator to seek non-military, multi-lateral approaches to foreign policy questions. John McCain strongly supported the Iraq War and military occupation and has always sought military solutions first to foreign policy questions.

6. Barack Obama has addressed the people’s economic crisis and has called for public investment in the economy, aid to states and localities, and tax reform that will erase the Bush tax giveaways to corporations and the wealthy. McCain and Palin, have called these policies “redistribution of wealth” and “socialism,” name calling of the kind that right-wing radio talk show hosts who run interference for Republican candidates usually specialize in, not the candidates themselves.

7. As president, Barack Obama would almost instantly reverse the extreme decline in US international prestige. He would be seen as a major break with the inter-related history of militarism, racism, and support for the rich and privileged through the world which has long undermined respect for the US. As president, John McCain would be seen globally as another Bush, another cowboy politician irrelevant to either the present global crisis or the aspirations of the people.

8. As president, Barack Obama would through regulatory revitalization send a signal to transnational corporations, banking institutions, and brokerage houses that the US will act to reverse the “casino capitalism” that has produced trillions in global losses over the last month. This is something capitalists will not publicly praise, but it is something that they know, as they did in the Great Depression that they need and cannot do for themselves. As president, John McCain would make gestures and look for scapegoats and try to swim with the Bush policies until the economy finds itself under water.

9. As president Barack Obama, who has already brought millions of new and mostly young people into the political process, would raise the standard of understanding and debate in US politics. Through increased popular participation, an Obama administration would make the country a “better democracy” to the benefit of all, including intelligent conservatives, who will be, as they are in other countries, compelled to seriously articulate their views rather than watching passively as others reduce their views to calculated flag-waving and name-calling.

10. If Barack Obama wins the presidency, it will be an enormous victory for all Americans against what has been the single greatest roadblock to progress and unity in US history: the effects of a racism born in slavery, continued through legal segregation, and maintained today overtly in some areas of life, covertly in others. If John McCain wins, given the disastrous Bush policies, the enormous economic crisis the nation and the world faces, it can only be understood at home and abroad as a victory for that racist history, institutions, and ideology, sending a message globally that the US electorate prefers to live in and with the prejudices of the past rather than look rationally at the present and face the future.

6 thoughts on “10 Things To Consider In The Voting Booth

  1. I know when I voted, I didn’t fully understand, but after I voted, I realized that I had made a decision that didn’t support a strong America. When I voted, I realized I voted for someone who would “do it for me” where I don’t have to be responsible for myself. After I made that decision, I now know that I didn’t make a decision based on creating a strong America.

    I want a candidate in office that will support me being an entrepreneur, which is what this country was founded on. This country is not about having the government being responsible for you, its about being an entrepreneur and having that self reliant spirit. And that was what this country was founded on. I don’t agree with everything McCain does, and how he campaigned, but he does know a little bit more about being an American and what it means to be an entrepreneur. And that is what this country needs right now, just a little bit more of that. So if you haven’t voted yet, vote for the candidate who will support us in being responsible for ourselves. This country does depend on it.

  2. Hi b4uno thanx for the comment…..I am not sure that I would agree with you on where the country was formed…I think it was more rich guys wanting to keep their money and not share with anybody, especially Mother England.

    McCain keeps saying he is for creating wealth, and that is true, just not creating it for the working class….Obama is no better…he is in the same pockets as McCain.

  3. I must disagree with both your history and your thoughts on economics on this point. Yes, the bubble burst in the market in 1929 but the ‘Great Depression’ started in 1933, after Roosevelt took office, and is mainly due to FDR’s manipulation of the free market. He raised tariffs and allowed companies to collude with one another on prices in order to drive those prices back up. He basically took away free trade and did not allow the supply and demand curves to set proper pricing. The free market is not perfect, nothing is, but it is efficient. The current economic crisis actually began when Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were authorized by the government to issue mortgages on “affordable housing” with the understanding that the gov. would back these loans. In 2000, when it was getting out of hand, McCain himself declared that these companies creating these loans and issuing them as securites needed to be regeined in. All we needed to light the match on this powder keg was for interest rates to suddenly go up rapidly,which they began to do in 2007. Hope this helps.

  4. Hello Thomas and thanx for the comment–first of all, there is a myth of a free market….there is none…the markets need government intervention if they are to survive.

    Somewhere we have to let something bottom out…..we cannot keep propping up companies while the backbone of the system, the workers, are allowed to fail. Once consumer products hit a low then the economy will be in bad shape and have a longer road to recovery.

    I suspect that the falling gas prices is more to keep an addict hooked than it is the price of oil.

    Sorry for the random thoughts…it is early or late depending on your thinking and I need coffee.

  5. I understand that there is no absolute “free” market, just like there is no absolute “democratic” government. Those concepts are not possible because some form of government must exist and must set some limitations.

    But, although labor is the muscle that moves industry forward, the brain is the entrepreneur and the life-blood is capital. You take away those and the muscle becomes lifeless. We want people in this country to take risks, to open businesses, to hire people, and create competition. Yes, the owner becomes the beneficiary of greater rewards than the worker when the company is successful, but isn’t that only fair. The owner is the one taking the risk and putting all of their capital into the enterprise. If the company fails, they lose much more than the employee who put in nothing but there time and was compensated for it.

    Final thought. Please do not get too seduced by conspiracy theories. Sometimes a spade is a spade. Prices are down because global demand is down. That simple.

  6. Thomas…thanx for commenting again…well never fear I am not a conspiracy theorist, but saying I do not believe in coincidence in politics. I will agree that the owner should garner a greater reward for his gamble, however when at it comes at the expense of the worker then I have a problem.

    But if there are incentives to “take a chance”, then it really is not that big of a chance. If the company fails then the workers lose and the owner gets tax incentives. I think if they want to make money then by all means make money, but not at the expense of the taxpayer, who seldom gets anything in return. Like the bailout, it is helping Wall Street, while Main Street is still thrashing around trying to make ends meet.

Leave a Reply to loboteroCancel reply