In the fall, American voters will most likely turn their Congress red. This would be a mistake. Phil argued in his article last week that Americans would (and should) elect Republicans to the House and Senate because Americans want to see economic reform. He is not entirely wrong, but what he and any American who casts a red ballot overlook is the damage a Republican Congress would cause to the United States.
The 2014 Gallup poll illustrates that Americans see economic issues and healthcare as top priorities, while they see social issues and global warming as low ones. I won’t refute this, but I will remind readers that 70 percent of Americans also do not know what the constitution is. Thus, just because polled Americans do not see social issues or global warming as pressing, it does not make those issues unimportant.
In fact, I would say that this is one of the fundamental differences between the GOP and the Democratic Party. Republicans heed that Gallup poll because they stick to the status quo in order to appease Americans. Democrats, however, push the limits and initiate necessary change. In the case of 2014’s midterm elections, we therefore have two options: 1) A static or even backwards nation under Republicans or 2) An advancing America where Democrats take on the critical issues to which Republicans turn a blind eye.
What’s the first issue that Democrats are addressing? The economy. Obama receives a lot of flak here, but I think that we should re-examine some facts. The economic stimulus package that Obama and the bipartisan Congress passed in 2009 turned GDP growth positive again and reignited economic growth. Doing so has helped add more jobs to the economy. Phil argued that September’s 5.9 percent unemployment was not perfect, (which is reasonable) but we cannot deny that this is a whole lot better than the 9.1 percent just after President Bush in 2009.
To stress the benefit of blue even further, personal disposable income has grown about six times more under Democratic presidents than Republicans throughout history. GDP has grown roughly seven times more under Democratic leadership. Corporate profits have grown under Democrats while they actually decreased under Republicans, and Republican presidents contributed two and a half times more to national debt than Democratic presidents.
So, what does this mean? First, the facts above show that Republican policies do not work in our favor; we need appropriate governmental intervention, as Democrats offer, that responds to problems in the modern world of finance and politics. Secondly, this means that we should keep our Congress in line with the party of our president, (as much as possible at least). Let’s not forget October 2013 when the Republican House chose to go into government shutdown rather than fund the Patient Protection Act along with Senate Democrats. (Wasn’t that a great example of Republicans having Americans’ interests at heart? Rejecting a plan meant to lower everyday medical costs and alleviate the number one cause of America’s fiscal problems!)
But the benefits of having Democrats in power do not stop there. Another advantage of a blue Congress? They will keep the country green! There is no section on climate change in the GOP’s 2012 platform -- actually, the platform opposes cap and trade programs and advises Congress to “take quick action to prohibit the EPA from moving forward with new greenhouse gas regulations.” I do not think that I need to prove climate change to Middlebury readers, but I will emphasize that Democrats are working on it. With a Congress that was at least half blue, Obama was able to increase fuel efficiency standards in 2011 and invest $90 billion in renewable technology. Would a fully Republican Congress allow those advances?
And Democrats catalyze change on social issues, too. While Republicans continue to roadblock gay marriage, Democrats have included it in their platform. Democrats have become the party to advance human rights, making sure that the Hate Crimes Prevention Act reached Obama’s desk for a signature while they controlled the Senate. In the process, Democrats were allies for another demographic as well: women. The party galvanizes the rights of women through equality laws, such as the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, while Republicans allow for those same rights to deteriorate. (Reminder: Senate Republicans tried to block the Fair Pay Act from passing.)
Therefore, when Phil says that Americans cannot afford for two more years of stalled government, I agree. We differ over his opinion that this stalled government comes from a bipartisan Congress and a Democratic president, however. I believe that a fully Republican Congress paired with a Democratic president would generate even more friction, but what’s more, due to erroneous Republican policies, a Republican Congress would weaken the United States. While Phil (and Bill Clinton) were not incorrect when they said, “It’s the economy, stupid,” I think there should be an amendment. It is the economy, stupid, but it’s also the environment and gay marriage and women’s rights... it’s what the leaders of our country offer on the whole, not just the change that they put in our pockets.
Artwork by ZARAI ZARAGOZA
