Respond to a new person and explain why you agree or disagree with their assessment of the issues that have been discussed or not discussed in this election. Please do not respond to anyone that you have already responded to this term.
Remember on Friday you'll get to discuss this election in person and soon we'll get to know the result (ie. who will win!)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
31 comments:
Will,
First of all, I am also very disappointed in the candidate’s lack of interest/ coverage of human right’s issues in Tibet and Darfur. I think that China has a lot of influence in these human right’s abuses and America is only supporting the genocide and destruction of culture by giving China money and jobs (2). Which, like you said, is putting America more and more in debt. Adding to that train of thought, oil is a huge issue that must be covered from more angles than just the foreign/domestic suppliers. China is the major source of income for Sudan, mainly because China receives a lot of its oil from Khartoum (2). The candidates have taken stances on the genocide in Darfur, however the main answer to questions regarding the issue is a generic one. Both candidates agree that we must end the crisis, but who doesn’t? Obama has said that by leading the way in stopping the genocide, other countries will follow and not let anything like it happen again (3). Eli Wiesel once said in reference to the holocaust, “Whenever men or women are persecuted because of their race, religion, or political views, that place must - at that moment - become the center of the universe” (1). I believe this statement to be complete truth, especially if we want a peaceful world. Neither candidate has made the genocide in Darfur the center of the universe. The struggling economy and other domestic issues is the reason for this. However, if both of them included Sudan and Tibet into their economic policies, we could work more toward Wiesel’s statement. More than the candidates, the media is to blame for the shortage of concern for human rights abuses (4). The media sets the policy agenda of our government. By giving issues more airtime, they can promote certain ones and put them at the top of the people’s and candidate’s agendas.
The one point that I have to disagree with you on is about how our nation can’t do anything about other issues until the economy is fixed. I think it is the opposite, the economy won’t be fixed until we do something about other issues. For example, until we raise taxes to create more social and community programs, we will not be able to eliminate poverty, therefore empowering the stagnation of the economy and increasing crime rates. Likewise, until we take a very in depth look at our foreign policy, we will not solve the oil/energy crisis and we will keep giving American’s jobs to China and other foreign countries. The economy should be a background issue in a sea of other issues that must be fixed first.
(1) http://www.gonshaw.net/Holocaust.htm
(2) http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/africa/10/19/somalia.china/index.html?iref=newssearch
(3) http://askthecandidates.org/
(4) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/26/AR2005122600547.html
In response to Angel-
I also think that gay marriage has taken the back seat in this election. I believe that it is hard for issues that don’t affect the entire population to be given high priority (1) “You have the economy, the war. It makes it more difficult for social issues to get people’s attention” political scientist Matthew Corrigan said. The gay community is showing frustration with both candidates lack of emphasis on the subject. (1)"We would like Sen. Obama to be much more emphatic in his opposition to Amendment 2. We'd like his campaign to acknowledge that in a stronger way," In a country where everyone is supposed to be treated equally no matter what their status, I believe gay marriage should be accepted.
I came upon an article that was dated about a year ago, before the bailout, and the economy failures etc, and found some interesting things. (2)”Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., is in favor of repealing the Defense of Marriage Act… a move that some legal experts believe would require all states to recognize gay marriages sanctioned by any state.” The article went on to discuss the great strides the Democratic Party was taking toward making gay marriage universal. The article showed the excitement in the gay communities that a candidate was paying attention to them (like Kennedy and the La Rasa Unida). I am sure that these same people are no longer satisfied with the attention or lack of attention they are receiving. The economy issues have put a shadow over these topics.
(3)John McCain has said, “to even reopen the issue" would be a "terrific mistake." Clearly his position is known when it comes to gay marriage. This would present a perfect opportunity for Obama to take a stand against McCain and get more gay and lesbian voters on his side. If Obama cannot face opposition now, he may not fare well in the white house. Although Obama agrees with McCain that marriage should be between a man and woman, he said, (3) “"federal law should not discriminate in any way against gay and lesbian couples, which is precisely what DOMA does." I think that this should be important in the media, and I think there needs to be more “buzz” on gay marriage. As you said the candidates seem to shy away from same-sex marriage, and I think that they need to state their positions.
(1)http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/19/gay-marriage/
(2)http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Decision2008/Story?id=3494526&page=1
(3)http://pewforum.org/religion08/compare.php?Issue=Gay_Marriage
In Response to Gracie:
I agree that energy is one of the issues that should receive more coverage. While I don’t think that energy is being ignored, more could be done to improve energy systems in the US. I think that both Obama and McCain need to be more specific about their energy plans. The article you site says that McCain also supports a “cap-and-trade” system (1). I do agree that more attention is focused on McCain’s plan to build nuclear power plants than Obama’s energy plan, but the specifics of his plan aren’t given enough coverage either. McCain is also wants to provide tax credits for energy technology development and research (2). Obama wants to enact a Windfalls Profits Tax, the tax revenue would go towards a $1000 energy rebate to American families (2). He would also invest $150 billions to increase the use of alternative energy (2). I agree that education is another over looked issue, but I don’t think it is entirely because of the government. American culture is unwilling to sacrifice creativity for education, and we don’t put as much value into education. McCain wants to provide portable school vouchers, allowing parents to choose between public and private schools (2). He also wants to restructure the incentive compensation system, which would award teachers who perform well (2). Obama would spend an additional $15 billion to education to create an early education program, and improve the No Child Left Behind Act (2). He would also offer a $4000 tax credit to offset high education costs (2). Immigration is also being over looked, since the economy has taken over the stage as the issue everyone is most concerned about. The media has even noted that the candidates have seemed to avoid talking about immigration (3). Immigration is and will become a key issue as more foreign born citizens and aliens enter our country (3). Immigration is also an issue that effects many aspects of other issues, such as our economy and alien workers, or the overcrowded and increasingly bilingual schools (3). Obama has recently begun to attack McCain for his shift on immigration policy (4). McCain once fought his party on immigration policy, but now he aligns himself with his party on immigration (4).
(1) http://www.mcclatchydc.com/260/story/54485.html
(2) http://media.www.harbus.org/media/storage/paper343/news/2008/10/27/Features/Republican.Vs.Democrat.Healthcare.Education.And.The.Environment-3507936.shtml
(3) http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/21/ED7N13LTVK.DTL
(4) http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aW8_E.DQSXBg&refer=home
This is in response to AJ’s post. I agree with everything in his post. I agree about economy, healthcare, energy and the war in Iraq being the most important issues to the public and the candidates (1). I also agree that they should be the most important because they are going to affect Americans the most, in the long term and short term. I also agree that the moral issues like gay marriage and abortion can wait til the election is over because they are not as important, immediate or critical. Since we are in an economic crisis, energy is of crucial importance, and the war in Iraq is controversial, those issues should take the main stage and moral issues should be on the sidelines. Not to say that they are not important, because they are very important to society. However in times such as these, they can be put off; especially because they are settled for the time being, like AJ said.
I also strongly agree with his second point that illegal immigration is not getting enough attention from the election. When I was writing my blog post I did not even think about that, but now that he brought it up, I believe that it is very valid. Unemployment is a huge issue right now, especially with the economy crisis. Americans are fighting to pay their bills and send their children to college. In January of this year, unemployment was 4.9%, but now it is up to 6.1% (2). I agree that the candidates talk about unemployment and the need to create jobs, but they do not often mention that illegal immigration is making the situation worse.
(1) http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues
(2) http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=wh&graph_name=LN_cpsbref3
This is in response to Molly. I agree with you that Social Security has not received enough attention. Social Security is facing a huge crisis. I also agree with you that because senior citizens have among the highest voter turnout rate in the country it would make sense for politicians to talk about issues that are important to them. I also think social security is an important issue because of its possible effect on the economy. One option to save social security would be to raise the age for retirement (1). Also, as you mention, the government will have to increase the debt to pay for social security or decrease spending in other areas. Increasing the debt could have many consequences. Currently we are spending more money on paying interest on the debt than on the Iraq War, which is hard to imagine (3). The debt will have to be repaid eventually, probably by the current leaders’ children and grandchildren (4). However, there is no specific plan for how to repay the national debt (3). Also, 25% of our debt is held by international lenders (5). Some of these international lenders include China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Brazil, and Russia (5). It weakens US demands in these countries when they hold so much of the US debt (5). Increased debt also weakens the US dollar (6). Because increased debt is such a huge problem, the candidates should be looking to ways to save the social security system.
However, I found it fairly easy to find information on Obama’s policies on social security even if there was not a large amount. I could not find any information on McCain’s site (2). This shows that he has not put much value in this issue.
(1) http://www.barackobama.com/issues/seniors/
(2) http://www.johnmccain.com/Search/?keyword="social%20security"
(3) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-bittle-and-jean-johnson/national-debt-passes-10-t_b_132732.html
(4) http://www.tahlequahdailypress.com/features/local_story_269100546.html
(5) http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/columnists/jlanders/stories/DN-landers_23bus.ART.State.Edition1.26dc513.html
(6) http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lazarus5-2008oct05,0,3237664.column
While I believe social issues are important and should have a significant amount of weight in the upcoming election, I have to agree with AJ’s claim that these types of issues will not be the determining factors. According to a poll conducted by NBC News on pollingreport.com, social issues were voted as something most cared about by only 10% of the people questioned (1). CNN also conducted a poll where it was discovered that 37% of the people regarded the issue of gay marriage as not that important (1). With the economy in such turmoil, the blunt truth is that Americans just do not have time. What matters most is the immediate needs for themselves and their families, and social issues seem to be a distant problem (2). Most social issues do not directly affect a majority of Americans, so at times like an economic crisis, many people revert to the mentality that it is not really their problem. They have more important things to worry about than legalizing abortion when they are worried about the financial safety of their families or affording college tuition. As expressed in the Heineman article we read earlier this year, when a crisis occurs, especially an economic one, instead of working together people tend to isolate themselves, only having time to be concerned with how the situation affects them (3). I’m not trying to make it sound like Americans are terribly selfish people, Im just saying that what comes first is your family and yourself, and this is extremely apparent in economic or other types of crises (3). Since this is what America is facing now, social issues are just not immediate enough to be paid that much attention. While I feel the majority of Americans would agree things like gay marriage, race relations, and abortion are important issues, they can also be delayed in our certain circumstances.
1. http://www.pollingreport.com/prioriti.htm
2. http://2008central.net/2008/07/16/social-issues-not-that-important-anymore/
3. Heineman article
This post is in response to Alec. I agree with that the topic of illegal immigration hasn’t been brought up lately in the election. An estimate range as high as 20 million illegal aliens are living in the United States and yet recently no has brought the topic up. (1) Some press indicate that since our financial crisis arose a huge number of illegal have returned to their home. Illegal aliens are here for the money and since the money has tightened up, and the job market has shrunk, they’re headed back home. (1) In the past both McCain and Obama had supported a bill that would extend social security benefits to illegal provide legal driver licenses for them. The reason is that if either side brings the topic up about the opposing candidate stand it will lead back to their own stand on the issue in which both candidates support the same thing about illegal immigration. Once the economy goes back up, there is a likely chance that illegal immigration will increase back up. (2) Lately there has been a declining immigration arrests in the south, which is probably linked to the slowing economy, since there are fewer jobs. I believe that illegal immigration should be one of the main issues that should be discussed, because there are millions of illegal aliens coming into the United States taking jobs away from Americans. If we were able to take make the borders tighter and deport illegal aliens back to their own country then there would be significant amount of jobs available for Americans in which can help decrease unemployment.
(1) http://www.smallgovtimes.com/2008/10/what-happened-to-illegal-immigration/
(2) http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6079516.html
In response to Emily Berglund, I agree that not enough attention has been placed on education reform in the United States. I agree that the No Child Left Behind act, which requires schools to meet certain standards before receiving funding (2) is not adequately serving its purpose. My mom can attest to this, as she is a teacher in the St. Paul public school system. Her school desperately needs more funding, but the struggle they are experiencing in maintaining high test scores is hindering the process. In order for our country to be successful, the problems with education need to be solved in a different way. While this legislation has been brought up the most in the few instances when the topic of education has been discussed, the candidates only seem to talk about whether it was a good idea or not in the first place, not how to fix the problem (1). The media has been focusing its attention on the Iraq war, the economy, and it is important to view how education as it is now will affect each of these, as addressing every issue requires knowledge (3). However, there has been little serious discussion of public education in the campaign (1). With the dropout rate as high as it is and with as many schools without the available resources they need to provide a good education to all students as there are, I am disappointed with the lack of attention that has been placed on the issue. Teachers need to be better prepared for modern education methods so that their students will be able to surpass the standards (4). As technology is becoming more and more vital to economic success in the United States, we need to make science and math education a priority (2). In other countries around the world, real standards are implemented to pass a student from one grade to another (4). These countries would no allow the kind of grade inflation we are suffering from here (4). In addition, because of the necessity of technological knowledge, job skill requirements are increasing (3). This means that in order for our country to be successful globally, post-secondary education needs to be more affordable and available to everyone so that these skills can be obtained (3). As someone who will be attending college in the near future, I strongly support cheaper college education, and I think the price it is at now makes it very difficult to believe the American theory that “everyone can be successful here.” If we truly want to boast about our country as one in which every child can succeed, then I suggest the media starts showing us what are candidates are going to do to praise students’ success, not punish them for their failure, as the No Child Left Behind legislation is currently doing.
1.)http://www.campaign.com/articles/news_education.html
2.)http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.education.html
3.)http://www.mylifetime.com/community/my-lifetime-commitment/ewc/education-and-2008-election
4.)http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/aug/15/leaders-emphasize-education-as-top-2008-election/
In response to Jen:
I agree that illegal immigration has not been addressed in this election season. In 2007, only a year ago, a massive immigration bill came up for a Senate vote (1). After the Senate’s rejection of the bill, however, one Chicago Tribune writer predicted that the issue would not come up again until after the presidential elections (1). McCain’s refusal to mention immigration reforms caused disgruntlements among many Republicans; a Time article stated that one of the reasons Virginia is currently leaning Democratic is because of McCain’s refusal to take a strong stance on illegal immigration (2). However, in a July Gallup Poll, results showed that fewer Americans favor reductions in immigration levels; 39% rather than the 45% from one year ago (3). 64% of Americans also now say that immigration is good for the country, which indicates that many Americans do not want a tougher immigration policy (3). This could imply that immigration policies have changed from this time last year, and fewer Americans are angry or passionate about this issue. This could be one of the reasons that both McCain and Obama have not been addressing illegal immigration reforms. Americans are also increasing their focus on the economy, and as gas and commodity prices rise people are more likely to be concerned about their pocketbooks than about the number of illegal immigrants within a community. Additionally, California, a state with 40% of the illegal immigrant population, is considered a ‘solid’ state for the Democrats (4, 5). Texas, New York, Illinois, and Florida are states with the next largest populations of illegal immigrants; of the four, Texas is ‘solid’ Republican and Illinois and New York are ‘solid’ Democratic states (4, 5). Florida is still considered a ‘toss-up’ state at this point in the election (4). Because states who are most affected by immigration policies are considered ‘safe’ by candidates, they are less likely to campaign on issues that matter most to those states and instead more likely to campaign in states they could ‘steal’ from their opponent. I also agree with your point on the candidates’ similarities; because people see no real difference between Obama’s and McCain’s policies, they are less likely to consider that issue when deciding a candidate.
1. http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-31761608_ITM
2. http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1854243,00.html
3. http://www.gallup.com/poll/108748/Fewer-Americans-Favor-Cutting-Back-Immigration.aspx
4. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=5
5. http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/USImmigrationFacts2003.pdf
This post in in response to Megan. I do agree with you; education is a very important issue that is not receiving enough attention. Yes, the economy is important, but education is our future. Both candidates believe that charter schools are an excellent option to help solve some of the problems in our educational system (1). McCain and Obama also agree that we must revise No Child Left behind; and move towards a "value-added" assessment (1). One focus of the Obama campaign is to appropriate more funding for Early Childhood Education from Congress, while the McCain campaign will increase and make access to vouchers easier (1).
McCain claimed that "Education is the civil rights issue of the 21st century" (2). McCain plans to let the parents of students CHOOSE where their child attends school; to promote healthy competition. McCain would also give portable vouchers for an easier decision of public or private schooling (2). McCain also plans to use up to 60% of the 3 billion dollars for education to restructure teacher quality programs, and pay increases for highly successful teachers who take jobs in failing schools (2).
Obama plans to put $18 billion into the education system to help restructure the failing 'No Child Left Behind' program (2). He also plans to have up to a $4,000 tax credit to help off set higher education expenses for parents (2). Obama would also increase the Head Start program; and put an emphasis on zero to five learning (2). One lofty goal Obama has is to have 50% of the nation taking AP or other college level courses by the year 2016 (2).
I believe that even though Education is not on the front page of the Issues - it will be a large part of the next Presidency. Both candidates have significant changes that should benefit the educational system in our nation.
(1)http://unioneagle.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1778&Itemid=1
(2)http://media.www.harbus.org/media/storage/paper343/news/2008/10/27/Features/Republican.Vs.Democrat.Healthcare.Education.And.The.Environment-3507936.shtml
Bremily:
I agree with you that the economy has been the largest issue in this election. When I looked at pollingreport.com, the first eight questions all asked which issue is most important to voters (differently phrased of course) and the economy was always at the top (1). Of those eight, the lowest percentage that said the economy was the most important to them was 39% (1). Clearly, this is an issue of great value to the people.
I also agree that the issue of gay marriage isn’t being addressed. This was an option for some of the polls mentioned above, but was grouped together with other issues and labeled “value issues” or “moral issues” (1). I agree that this needs to be addressed more clearly, but as of now the war in Iraq and the economy are more of a general welfare issue than gay rights and seem to be more important to a larger group of people. Also, I don’t think there is a lot to be said about gay rights because its more black and white than the economy- you’re either for it or against it like McCain and Obama (2). There isn’t as much gray area as the economy issue because with the economy there are infinite amounts of plans that could be designed, while gay marriage only has so many options. Therefore, I think the media isn’t really focusing on this because there just isn’t much to say about it.
I honestly think that gun control is getting more attention than it should. Again, with this issue there’s not as much gray area as the very important issues. Also McCain and Obama have almost identical views on this issue. Both voted for a 2005 law that would prohibit lawsuits against gun manufacturers due to acts committed by others using their products (3). Both supported instant criminal background checks when people buy guns as well as sales at gun shows (3). They do, however, differ on support of the assault weapons, but both supported making guns childproof and supported a child safety lock amendment in 2005 (3). Obviously, if the candidates don’t really diverge in opinions on a topic, it isn’t as interesting to the public because there aren’t really any options. Honestly, I think the issue of gun control is getting more attention than it should with the focus of Palin’s NRA membership (4). I feel like one of the stereotypes commonly associated with Palin is that she is a gun-slinging hick from small-town Alaska. This draws more attention to the gun issue than is needed. I recently saw an SNL skit that Palin was actually on that made fun of this image of her when Amy Poehler performed a rap about Palin (5). Overall, I agre that the economy is getting a lot of media attention because it is an issue that is very important to the people. While I’m not saying that gay marriage and gun control aren’t important issues, they aren’t as important in comparison with the economy. Also, I think they are lacking media attention because there aren’t as many options for a solution on gun control and gay marriage as there is on the economy.
1. http://www.pollingreport.com/prioriti.htm
2. http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.samesexmarriage.html
3. http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.gun.html
4. http://losttarget.blogspot.com/2008/08/sarah-palin-nra-life-member-fisherman.html
5. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6ya39slPgs
Jill –
I agree with you that the economy has been a hot topic, but I actually feel as though the War in Iraq and energy issues have not received the attention they deserve.
I also cited the statistics you used in my blog post that states how 57% of the people believe the economy is the main concern [1]. This is for good reason, as you stated, because the issues it involves are crashing down on almost every American. The housing market is struggling, as illustrated by the recent wave of foreclosures and the events surrounding Fannie Mae [2]. On a larger scale, the global economy is struggling with recession [3] as the American markets such as the INDU and S&P 500 and others such as the Nikkei and various European markets continue to fall drastically [3]. This is a significant crisis, and it is necessary for our next president to be able to deal with the turmoil well. However, as important as the issue of homelessness is, I actually don’t feel it is that significant of an issue in the election. It certainly is a major and growing problem, considering the economic crisis, but I don’t believe it is too much of a partisan issue. While the parties will act according to tradition with the Democrats taking more direct action and interest in an attempt to make housing environments more equal, the Republicans certainly will not simply turn their heads and cite Social Darwinism for homeless conditions. It is a fact that although single men make up about 60% of the homeless population, but families still make up about 1/3 of it and are the fastest growing group [4]. It is important that measures be taking to address this issue and work on prevention in addition to emergency shelter, as is states by the McKinney Homeless Assistance Act of 1987 [4]. While the exact methods of helping the homeless may differ slightly, the main goal is still the same. Thus, it would almost be pointless for the candidates to debate their views.
On the other hand, the policies for the War in Iraq and the energy crisis are polar opposites. In contrast with your statement, I think that both of these issues have not received attention. While it is true that the War in Iraq affects fewer Americans than does the economic crisis, it is still important that the US maintain a stable role in the global scene, especially considering that multinational corporations have made the world an increasingly smaller place. On the issue of troop withdrawal, the candidates differ. McCain has no plan for immediate withdrawal while Obama would make it complete by the summer of 2010 [5]. Considering that there is much to be debated here and that it was the number issue prior to the economic issue, I think that the candidates should have addressed this issue more.
[1] - www.pollingreport.com/prioriti.htm
[2] - http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/10/06/economy.homeless.ap/index.html?iref=newssearch
[3] - http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/10/24/zakaria.financialcrisis/index.html?iref=newssearch
[4] - http://www.solutionsforamerica.org/thrivingneigh/homelessness.html
[5] - http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.iraq.html
In Response to Jessie,
Finally somebody else is pointing out how Sarah Palin is receiving too much attention! I agree that the media coverage that is being dedicated towards her is detracting from the main two candidates. I am getting extremely sick of hearing about her getting $150,000 dollars from the RNC for clothing (1). Please give the woman a break, she is running for the second highest public office in the land, and cannot look like a slob. The price tag may have been a bit excessive, but who’s checking the prices of Obama or McCain’s suits? Secondly, Tina Fey’s SNL spoof of Palin is hurting the McCain campaign overall. TIME Magazine even said that, “The result [has been]: a seamless blending of reality and parody. When voters close their eyes now and envision Public Palin, likely as not they see Tina Fey” (1). Finally, I don’t understand why so much attention is being paid to her personal life. Yes it is very interesting that she was in the Ms. Alaska pageant and is a hockey mom, but will that really affect her ability to perform the duties of office? No.
I also agree that the alleged terrorist linking between Obama and men like William Ayers have been blown way out of proportion (2). The media provoked a response from McCain in the third debate by saying, ““Your running mate said he palled around with terrorists” (2). Obviously McCain had to respond to this. I have a hard time believing that most Americans would believe that Obama is a terrorist, but then again some people still think that he is Muslim.
Third issue that you addressed, Education, is the issue that I felt deserved much more attention than it received. As I said before, “[The] White House hopefuls are divided on the federal government's role in education as Congress considers changes to President Bush's signature schools law, the No Child Left Behind Act, and how to make college affordable” (3). The official campaign websites are vague, with only reform and change being mentioned like you pointed out (4, 5). The U.S. is graduating a lower number of college students than many other industrialized countries, and this is a problem (3). I think that bipartisan, open dialogue between the two parties and the top authorities in education is necessary to resolving the problem. If we don’t shape up the American education system today, tomorrow’s kids are going to be even further behind.
1. http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1853529,00.html
2. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/16/us/politics/16debate.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&ref=opinion
3. http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/columnists/jlanders/stories/DN-landers_06bus.ART.State.Edition1.463cb1f.html
4. http://www.barackobama.com/issues/education/
5. http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/19ce50b5-daa8-4795-b92d-92bd0d985bca.htm
In response to Savann:
I defiantly agree that poverty has been over looked and pushed aside. Today on any given night in Minnesota, over 9,000 adults, youths, and children are homeless (1). Times that by 50 states? That’s 450,000 Americans per night, give or take. That is unacceptable and actions must be taken to combat this problem. Everyone is giving so much attention to other topics that are indeed crises but we need to think about our home and our people first. Another number that may surprise many is that on any given night nearly 3,000 children sleep without a bed and are homeless (1). Is that how we want the youth of our nation to grow up? We need to ask ourselves this and the obvious answer is no, so we must fight for change.
Back in 2002, National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty estimated that about 3 million men, women, and children would be homeless for some part of that year (2). We can not just stand by and watch our brothers and sisters continue to struggle with homelessness. Some people think that this problem is something that doesn’t affect them but in our hometown of Bloomington, 3,343 people meet the federal definition of living in poverty, which is based on the relationship between a family’s size and income (1). It’s time to take a stand and let the government know that we want and need change because the people of America are struggling and there is no better time than the present.
1. Minnesota Coalition for the Homeless www.mnhomelesscoalition.org
2. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/features/july-dec02/homeless.html
jh
In response to Amanda…
I disagree with you that the media and candidates have done a good job covering the election. While the issues you mentioned, like the economy and the energy crisis, are very important, it is important to think of other issues that will come up when these issues have been solved. Sure, the presidential candidates can promise that they will fix the economy and figure out the energy crisis, but what do they plan to do for the rest of their time in office? This is where fair coverage of the issues comes in. What about the thousands of homeless people living in our country’s urban areas? What about the funding that is being pulled from our schools’ art programs to raise test scores to comply with No Child Left Behind? Rising college costs (something that will be of major concern to people our age in the coming months)? These and many issues will be the main concern of Americans after the next President and congress solves the current problems. I feel it is important for these issues to get some coverage now so voters can know what to expect from the future leader of our nation.
The nation’s attention has been focused too much on the immediate, and not enough on the future.
I also disagree with you that gay marriage should be an issue of any concern at all. Marriage should be recognized by the government as a union between two people; it shouldn’t matter if the couple is hetero or homosexual. Outside of that definition, the act of marriage becomes religious; and the constitution guarantees the “separation of church and state.” If the religious body that the couple belongs to decides not to recognize the union, there is nothing that the government can do to interfere.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/
I am responding to Bjorn’s post, and I agree with him that the energy problem isn’t getting enough coverage. According to polls, the economy and the war in Iraq are the biggest issues to the people of the United States (1). I think that they are getting the coverage that they deserve, but I think that some of that time should still be devoted to the energy problem (2). I think that with gas prices going down recently, most people are starting to break off of the panic we were in and now it is just a slight concern. Our situation isn’t much different, and I think people are forgetting that now that it isn’t costing them as much now. We still really need to come up with alternative and clean energy, or else oil prices will go up and people will have to pay it, putting another big hit on our economy because consumers can’t buy as many other goods. I think that people are only concerned about issues that directly affect them, and the economy is what really does that. That is why it is the top concern. But I agree that the energy crisis isn’t getting the coverage that it used to get or than it deserves.
I agree that foreign policy is also getting too much attention. Things like Russia invading Georgia really don’t affect us directly, so I don’t see why we are putting so much emphasis on it. It is a moral issue, the American responsibility to “protect democracy,” and I don’t think it should be as important as things like the economy or energy. Maybe if Georgia was a really important ally, or if they were providing us with oil, maybe then it would make sense to be really concerned, but since they don’t I don’t see why it’s in our presidential debates instead of energy. So overall I agree that energy isn’t getting enough coverage and some foreign policy is getting too much attention.
Sources:
(1) http://www.pollingreport.com/prioriti.htm
(2) http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues
Savann:
I agree with Savann’s opinion that poverty has not been given enough attention in this election. With the crisis in the economy and all the problems with that, I think that poverty is going to be an increasing problem. As of August 2008, there are 37.3 million Americans living in poverty (2). It is important for our politicians and government to have a clear plan to stick to. I understand that ending poverty is going to take a lot of time and money, but it will be worth it. It is estimated that to cut poverty in half it will cost over $90 billion a year (2). Homelessness is an issue that is near and dear to me. I am on the committee for Box City Vigil and am an intern for the Minnesota Coalition for the Homeless, so I may be biased towards the issue, but I definitely think that something needs to be done. If I could vote, this would be an issue I would strongly consider, so I wish there was more media coverage on it so I could learn more.
McCain’s plan includes requiring all welfare recipients to work at least 40 hours a week and supporting housing assistance for people on welfare (1). He wants to transfer homeless housing programs to the states through the use of block grants. McCain believes that poverty and homelessness is a shared responsibility between all three levels of the government (1). Obama’s plan includes providing money for transitional jobs and career pathway programs, creating a Green Job Corps to provide young people jobs in their communities, raising minimum wage to $9.50 by 2011, and supporting the Affordable Housing Trust Fund (3). I found it interesting that on Obama’s issues on his website there was a short one about poverty, but on McCain’s issue’s there was no poverty issue. This shows that not only do the media need to pay more attention to homelessness and poverty, but so do the candidates.
1. http://www.ontheissues.org/20/John_McCain_Welfare_+_Poverty.htm
2. http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2008/08/26/mccain-poverty/
3. http://www.barackobama.com/issues/poverty/
Bjorn-
You bring up a good point about the energy crisis, but I think there’s a reason (and a good reason for the candidates) as for why they don’t concentrate on it. The similarities between the candidates’ views are as following: reduce dependence on foreign energy, explore new areas of renewable energy sources, and provide short term relief for those struggling to pay at the pump. The key difference between the candidates is the decision to drill or not. It is arguably a big difference, but relatively short term and they differ much greatly on other issues. Part of a campaign is to show the American public, through the media, how different they are from each other (1)(2). I think the energy crisis is not the best area with which to show such differences.
You also mentioned the scope of air pollution damage. 3,000 premature deaths is a lot. However, let it be noted that since the beginning of the war, an estimated 85,000 Iraqi citizens have been killed, 25,000 during last year alone (3). Also, the number of foreclosures on homes for the first fiscal quarter in California alone was upwards of 170,000 (4). The media tends to focus on issues that immediately affect a large amount of people. At this time, the economy is one of those issues.
Despite all these facts, I agree with you. Not nearly enough time is spent on the energy crisis. It is undoubtedly one of the largest issues facing America and we’ve been procrastinating too long.
P.S.- good playing tonight at the game. You’re kind of a beast at soccer.
(1)-http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/da151a1c-733a-4dc1-9cd3-f9ca5caba1de.htm
(2)-http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newenergy
(3)-http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/
(4)-http://www.realtytrac.com/ContentManagement/pressrelease.aspx?ChannelID=9&ItemID=4566&accnt=64847
I would like to respond to Jessie, because even though Megan already did, I have a bit of a difference of opinion on the same subject:
I agree with Jessie on her statement that Sarah Palin is definitely getting too much publicity in this election. However, as to the SNL parodies of her, I think that that’s a given with any election. While SNL seems to be decidedly liberal, the show hasn’t spared any politician worth making fun of in the past decade or so, whether they were a Republican or a Democrat. Some politicians who were ridiculed on there I can name off the top of my head were Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, both Obama and McCain, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell, John Kerry, John Edwards, Hilary Clinton, and more.
Also, about her having become a near-celebrity, I think that is exactly what the McCain campaign was hoping for, although it’s beginning to look like that decision had a more negative rather than positive effect. I also agree with Jessie having said that Sarah Palin’s publicity has masked other issues/candidates in the election, because I think a lot of people are considering the idea that McCain could in fact die, so even if they do support John McCain, voters have to ask themselves if they are willing to take the chance on electing such an old candidate to office with the possibility that his vice president may really have to take over and preside over the country. But I do have to mention that I think Megan is right about the media covering Palin’s clothes; I think it’s kind of sexist of them to investigate how much money the RNC has spent on her wardrobe and not any of the men’s in the election. I hope that Palin’s personal life won’t affect her performance in office, but I must say that with a baby as young as her son, it seems to me that that might distract just a little bit from her duties in office. It’s hard to ignore how tired the parents with young children in my life are; it makes me wonder if Palin will be able to handle the duties of motherhood and those of her office.
Also, I talked about Obama’s “friendship” with Bill Ayers in my second post, and I will repeat what I said then again: If Obama were running for any leadership position in the United States, why would he have any inclination to associate himself with a terrorist, unless he was somehow unaware of who the man was or before Ayers committed any crimes. I think that the media should be more intelligent about the stories they cover, because they could really end up having a large effect on how voters choose their candidate, or really more like what they consider is important, like we read in our textbook. I also thought it was interesting in how Obama made that comment about McCain depending so much on those ridiculous allegations (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/16/us/politics/16debate.html?ref=opinion.) Overall, I think what the candidates need to do in the days left before the election is be clear on how they are going to solve the nation’s problems. They need to get the public eye away from petty news stories like these, and onto their policies and beliefs in what needs to be done for America. After all, this is the election for the president of the United States of America. It seems to me like it might be time to grow up.
I am responding to Amanda
First I do have to agree that the issues that you listed as most important are true. Even though I might have chosen a different line up, and put terrorism and Iraq into the same group as foreign policy. I do agree with you on the sense of the economical problem and how people feel about their money.
What I do disagree on is the “issue” of gay marriage. Gay marriage is a moral standpoint, defined by an individual’s own point of view. Marriage itself is still defined as a religious bond between a man and woman. Though the bond between man and woman can and is looked over in the definition, the religious aspect still affects it. There is a definite separation of church and state so the matter is really left up to the religion itself. Many articles such as “A gay-marriage Pandora’s Box” address the fact of whether or not rejecting gay marriage is threatening to ones freedoms given to the citizen in the first amendment. But, defining marriage as a part of religion the government can’t stop homosexuals from getting married. So I think that this “issue” would have been useless to either of the candidates because it has no political power, because it is separate from the government, and because of its moral standings will never be fully accepted because no matter what, some individual is going to look at it as wrong and fight against it.
Lauren the Wise:
I don’t agree that social security is an issue that has been under covered in this election. I think the social security issue and the healthcare issue kind of go together. In a CNN poll, about 46% of people polled think that social security and Medicare are extremely important in choosing a president and 32% said that it will be very important (1). Social security and healthcare are two different issues, but both suffer the same problem of being underfunded and will lack sufficient money in the future (2, 3). Both candidates have different, if not opposite, views on social security and healthcare policies too (1).
The lessened attention to the social security issue is probably caused by the heightened attention of the economy issue. The economy is plunging right now, so voters feel more affected by it than if analysts were to say the economy will take bad turn in the near future. People are more likely to worry about something happening currently than something happening in the past. The economy has supplanted the social security issue because of its currentness and its extremeness.
I agree with you that the candidates’ personal lives receive way too much attention. A video online states that “the number one issue among voters is bulls**t” (4). I’m not sure if this video actually has facts from reliable sources, but it does highlight how people may vote on the basis of looks, activities, relationships and other personal life issues (4). As you said, the candidates and their campaigns play on people’s emotions to win them over instead of on their intelligence. I find it annoying because I do not like being manipulated or at so easily. I enjoyed your sarcasm, it was refreshing, but you are right that many people assume things without actually researching to find out the facts.
1) http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.socialsecurity.html
2) http://www.socialsecurityreform.org/problem/index.cfm
3) http://seniorliving.about.com/od/manageyourmoney/a/healthcarecosts.htm
4) http://www.theonion.com/content/video/poll_bullshit_is_most_important
To asampson,
I agree with your comment. Currently, illegal immigration is almost invisible to the media when they look into what they think are the important issues. Although, I have to admit that building a wall along the whole U.S.- Mexican boarder is a ridiculous plan, at least they were addressing this as a problem. There is estimated to be about 12 million illegal aliens right now in the U.S. (1). The number is increasing daily and at a faster pace during G. W. Bush’s second term as president (2).
This is hurting our economy because so many people in the U.S. are taking jobs away from Americans and the legal immigrants, but it also helps our economy grow more. These people are the ones that work hard for small wages which can keep small businesses in the market, like certain farms or factories. They also take the jobs that the Americans don’t want to do but ones that need to be done (2).
You’re right about people are spending way to much time on those little scandals. The extreme supporters come up with little details, blowing it out of proportion and feeding some of the Americans fears, like the ad that connects the terrorist Weather Underground Organization with Obama. People started doubted his faith in Christianity in favor thinking of him a “closet Muslim” because of his middle name Hussein. In some of their opinions, Obama being Muslim meant that he was also a terrorist (3). Things like these are obviously false, but they are receiving too much attention that should be focused on the important issues.
1) http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5310549
2) http://usliberals.about.com/od/immigration/a/IllegalImmi.htm
3) http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/obamas_weatherman_connection.html
4) youtube.com (comments)
In response to klake. I completely agree that the economy has jumped to the forefront of debate. And I also agree that it has had the effect of pushing out social security, health care and Iraq. So much so that Obama didn’t even name Social security in the top three in importance in that last debate with John McCain. McCain probably would have left it out, also, had he thought of it. But I seriously think that there is a good reason for it and that is that nothing can be accomplished right now with all of the government’s money going to the bailout, or already in the hands of other public and private debt holders. Its sensible that you can’t talk about spending money in one area when all your money is locked away already and you can’t get it back. I think that’s how it is with the current economic crisis, and until that is fixed, all the social security, healthcare and Iraq plans are going to be based on the economy. That said, the candidates have used the current economic crisis to boon the platforms on many of these issues that they have had all along, regardless of whether they are currently getting less attention or not. Easy example, Obama has used the situation to say that McCain is “more of the same” [as Bush]. McCain has been able to use the economy as an extra push for people to fear that Obama will raise taxes (1) and is only interested in spreading the wealth around, when Americans really can’t afford it (2). Obama has pushed his policies against McCain, ones that he has had all along, like need for new renewable energy, affordable healthcare, improved education prospects, and leaving Iraq by using it in the context of the economic problems (3). But Obama said it best on with, “The cost of this economic crisis, and the cost of the war in Iraq, means that Washington will have to tighten its belt and put off spending on things we can afford to do without” (3). Clearly, he, and likely John McCain too, understand that getting things done on health care and social security is going to be impossible without dealing with the economy first. I truly think that there is a lot more they should talk about, but it is not great timing for. For instance, world hunger and stuff like that. The concerns of others that are really only humanitarian concerns for us. So I agree that their focus is undesirably thin, but I also think that it covers more than we give them credit for and the candidates and media don’t have a choice but to focus on the economy.
(1) http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/27/campaign.wrap/index.html
(2) http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/
(3) http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/27/fact-check-obamas-closing-argument/#more-26805
In response to A.J.
I would have to agree that the issue that have the most media attention are the War in Iraq, economy, health care and welfare (1). I don't think they are receiving too much attention because this issue affect the people the fastest (2). I would agree with A.J. that also, there have been many court cases on all of the moral issues, making them settled cases for the time being. Courts have recently ruled against same sex marriage, and there are many states that have banned it (3). I would also agree that immigrant has not received any media attention. But I would have to say that urban issues have not received as much media attention as Obama would have liked.
Sources:
(1) http://www.pollingreport.com/prioriti.htm
(2) http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues
(3) http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/14/us/politics/14marriage.html?scp=6&sq=US%20main%20election%20issues&st=cse
To Erik From Dana-
I know that America has put notice to the fact that Barack is black and McCain is old, but I disagree with you that is getting to much coverage. McCain is just as "old" as other legislatures, and yes it is exciting that we could possibly have the first Africa American president, that doesn't mean its recieving to much attention. I haven't read an article about the fact hes black, or that McCain is old since the official endorsements of the candidates were made. Iraq is of great importance, and is recieving the adequate amount of campaign attention. Both presidents have very different views and outlooks of the direction of the war and needs to be addressed since we have been in this war since 2001. Issues of immigration are important, and that can tie into the economy. There has been much speculation that immigrants (legal or illegal) are taking away jobs because they are willing to work for so little. (p.s. I'm not saying all immigrants are hurting the economy either...just some) Immigration would have more attention, but America currently wants to hear about how either of the future presidents are going to fix our economy. The economy is a serious issue, and I am not surprised that immigration has been put on the back burner in the election. In a recent poll the issues that can decide the election are the economy and health care. Thats what Americans want to hear about, and many Americans are not educated on immigration, so can't have the best opinions on what should be done. - Dana
In response to Lauren:
Lauren, I agree that social security was under discussed. Social security is another example proving my belief that most politicians just postpone dealing with the problems that come back to haunt us every couple decades like gas prices. I find it stupid how the candidates and the media get caught up in stories like Sarah Palin spending $150,000 on clothes when social security issues that affect everyone are going to go from bad to catastrophic in the next 10-15 years. Baby boomers have already started retiring and will continue to do so for the next 15 years, and with new medical discoveries increasing life expectancy the pressure on social security will only increase. Our generation is going to face a lot of trouble trying to support the baby boomers. Based on a survey of adults by polling report, 63% believe that if social security stays the same, it will collapse by 2042 (1). I understand that Sarah Palin’s shopping sprees are more entertaining to some people than the economy, but the point of the media is to educate people on what is happening in the world. They are NOT supposed to waste our time telling all the unimportant details of other people’s personal lives. We have the program Entertainment Tonight for that purpose. Problems like social security cannot be solved quickly because there are more and more people that are going to apply for it. Personally I think that people need to start taking some responsibility for their own retirements, but not all Americans are this logical. 61% of adults surveyed believe that government needs to give guarantees for the future, but in its current state, social security might not even be around for very long (1). Although I would favor guarantees, the most logical thing I think we can do is ease into a system that gradually emphasizes more personal investments like 401ks & IRAs in order to lessen the tension on the system. Whatever stance we take on fixing social security, we need to start the new program so that the system can transition smoothly as it has to accommodate more people. If we don’t, the system will fall apart and we will have millions of angry Americans who don’t get anything after forking over about 7% of their income over the past 40 or so years.
82% of adults surveyed believe we are responsible for fixing social security now so it is available to future generations. The support of the people is there, now we need to find politicians who won’t ignore social security just because they have their retirement and health care benefits covered through tax-funded pensions (2). Perhaps Obama and McCain do care more about issues like social security then I give them credit for, but they better stop avoiding questions and make their priorities clear if they want to be elected.
Sources:
1. http://www.pollingreport.com/social2.htm
2. http://www.freedomworks.org/informed/issues_template.php?issue_id=1506
To katie B
I have to say I agree with you on the fact that poverty seems an untouched issue in this election. The nation is turning into a suburban nation with less big cities and more branching out of populations.(1) I don't agree however that we need to rebuild our nation's economy from the ground up because I don't think anyone would know the best way to do that to make it successful. I think we need to find ways to not overtax our people whether we lower taxes for the poor and increase them for the wealthy or whether it remains a constant percentage with all people. I also think we need to fix our welfare system so people don't become overly dependant on it. Many people just stay on welfare even though they could physically get jobs. If we want to help fix poverty we need to help people rely on themselves and not the government and by taking people off welfare who aren't in desperate need we could put it into work programs and jobs to help boost the economy.
Anthony,
While I agree with you that education was an underemphasized issue, I would have to disagree that it is a more immediate need than the fight against terrorism. I think that education is more important than fighting against terrorism in the long-run. We have significant problems in our education system. According to NAEP assessments in 200, only 32% of fourth graders are proficient in reading, 26% in mathematics, 29% in science and 18% in history. More than half of all poor students who take the NAEP assessment tests do not pass (1). I believe that we should consider what Anthony said about education being an investment in an intelligent future for America, but I don’t agree that education is something that will have a greater immediate impact. Investing in education is not investing in today, but tomorrow. A more educated public will result in a less poverty-stricken and more productive society. According to a “debt clock” that keeps track of our national debt through the use of news articles, our government has $10,536,462,350,016.39 in outstanding public debt. I believe that we should focus on recovering our economy and the suffering stock market before we look at investing in a product for our future.
1. http://www.heritage.org/Research/Education/WM134.cfm
2. http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
oh and I accidentally posted this on the other blog but I did it on time! sorry
Post a Comment