What Happened to Reform?
For the sake of national security, I hope the Republicans win this year. I don’t say that because their national security policy has been perfecto, but because the Democrats don’t seem to be at all serious about national security, turning any move the President makes whether good or bad into a chance to complain about the President’s policies. Let’s face it, the Democrats really just hate the President, and that’s all there is to it. They’ve been sore since his original election.
When the President made his last state of the union address, listening to what many of the pundits said, Left and Right, it seemed to be a loser. But thinking back to that address, did he not mention Social Security reform and energy reform? Our country desperately needs to move on each of these issues. Unfortunately, politicians on both sides of the aisle seem to be too afraid to get serious about them.
Social Security reform became a losing issue, because the going you-know-where in a handbasket crowd stirred the pot of fear. I don’t even know what the reaction of seniors was, but when President Bush suggested this, he indicated that for the present group of seniors, nothing would change.
Politicians who continue telling us that we should never change Social Security are the ones who are not being honest with themselves. I get the impression that Democrats don’t want to change it because it is their legacy—oh yeah, and because it is against Bush. Wishy-washy Republicans don’t want to change it, because they’re worried about not getting the votes of the Seniors—though arguably the most affected by fearmongering are FDR Democrats anyway.
There is no Social Security trust fund. Politicians would like you to think that, but there is really only a black hole. Social Security monies have been spent away long ago. If you are drawing Social Security, the burden of paying for you falls to the those who are still working and paying into the system. They will be paid for by the younger generation. However, there are a few problems. People are not only living longer, but the generation after the baby boomers was a smaller generation. Fewer people are paying for a greater number of people.
The proposed policy for change was this: President Bush proposed an idea where a new system would be phased in. For the seniors things wouldn’t need to change. For the younger folks, they could leave things the way they are, or start paying into real personal accounts. Of course, the government might have to spend less of our money, but that would be a good thing wouldn’t it?
One of the other proposals in the last state of the union address was weaning America off oil dependency. I just heard on the news that OPEC is seriously considering cutting production, which of course will raise oil prices again. (And come on, those folks have nothing to do with Cheney or Halliburton for crying out loud!)
In terms of energy policy, consider these things: Did you know that there are people in our country who have self-sufficient homes that produce enough energy—I believe they use wind and solar—to send back to the electric company? In other words, the electric company is paying them. There are biofuels that our own farmers can produce; this would be a winner situation for our farmers too.
In a recent Reader’s Digest, a new kind of buoy—yes, a buoy—was highlighted that could be placed all over our coastlines relatively economically, in which energy is produced by the up and down motion of the waves. The energy is also compatible with our energy grids. And of course, the coolest thing I’ve seen recently, was a segment (showcased on the BBC; you can check it out on Youtube) about a car touted as running on seawater (it has a hydrogen fuel cell) Check out the link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ry6w3mRm-FM
And in the meantime, America needs to stick it to OPEC and Venezuela by cranking up domestic oil production (instead of thwarting it) and allowing some new refineries to be built.
Once people didn’t like the President’s state of the union ideas, our politicians, D and R, reverted to the old state of mind. That’s no longer enough. Of course, it’s not easy. It’s going to take some work. It’s going to take some guts about making decisions and leading (even if unpopular). Unfortunately, congress was hampered by obstruction in terms of the Social Security issue. However, on the bright side of things, private industry has a lot more to do with energy research as long as government keeps its hands out of things.
Change can happen almost overnight. Consider this: if all of the signs and facades at Amoco Stations can become BP so quickly, wouldn’t it be possible to phase in some new energy refueling stations relatively quickly once the cars were available? And as for the typical consumer, eventually, we’re all going to need new cars anyway.
Our politicians have to do what they can to make the great new technologies more common. This doesn’t necessarily mean that they throw money at these issues, but giving tax breaks, and setting policies that make it more rewarding for our companies to move away from oil would make a big difference. Maybe some deregulation if necessary. And as for our workers in the oil industry, they will be absorbed into new industries, and good old American ingenuity will help them to move on to a bold future. –Cal Samuel August
Leave a Reply