A Draft in the United States?

That's what is being proposed by Congressman Rangel. First off, will it happen? No. But, it's an interesting idea. First off, it'll create more equality in the military. Anyone who supports a war will really support a war. Why? Because they are in effect supporting the concept of sending their own relatives (or themselves) off to war no matter their income level--it does encourage a little more accountability. I suspect the United States would be much less likely to go to war on "faulty intelligence" if something like this was in place.

With that said, forcing people to go to war might also lead to unmotivated people destroying morale. Of course, morale isn't real high when the stays are extremely long either. But, I suspect it would be problematic for the military. Required civil service might be a little more interesting, as it would force responsibility while not forcing people to risk their lives. So, it's an interesting concept with ups and downs. It won't end up going anywhere I'm sure, but it makes for interesting discussion.

American Politics: A Return to the Center

The call for change was loud and clear yesterday. As expected, the House of Representatives was won by the Democrats. But, much more surprisingly, the Democrats have taken the Senate 51-49. It seemed like an unlikely scenario going in, but with Webb's victory just called (although a recount may be requested), almost everything went perfectly for the Democrats.

So, what does this mean? Iraq has obviously been a mess. With President Bush announcing Rumsfeld is stepping down--only a week after he said he'd remain--it's clear that they were disappointed with the results and feel Iraq is the problem. And, it is to a degree. But, as Senator McCain mentioned, the GOP's spending was an issue for their base too.

What's exciting in my opinion is this should signal a return to the center. Numerous policies that got away from our nation's founding principles should be remedied. Narrow issues that appeal to single-issue voters like abortion, gay marriage, and guns didn't carry the day--it came down to the big picture. Fear also didn't tilt the election, or perhaps it did in favor of the Democrats. People may be realizing that aggression abroad only makes this nation more vulnerable.

Luckily, I think both sides see the need to compromise and work together once again. The Republicans received a very sobering message loud and clear. Democrats, I believe, realize they won a lot of tight races and in some cases they benefited from massive failure by the other candidate (or, in many cases, failure of just their candidate's party). While President Bush's power has been reduced, the incentive for government to be productive has been boosted.

In my opinion, it was a great day for America. I believe it's rarely healthy to have Congress and the Executive Branch controlled by the same party. And, thankfully, that's no longer the case. Let's get back to sensible spending, international cooperation, moderate policy making, and less indirect special interest control of our politics.

Fiscal Responsibility and the GOP?

On election eve, along with the social security advertisements the GOP is running locally, the party is also talking about candidates who might vote for (or have voted for) tax increases. Of course, they forget to point out who is responsible for driving up governmental spending of late. Tax cuts mixed with spending increases are fiscally irresponsible. It's quite a change for a party that used to be considered fiscally conservative.

I am happy the advertisements will end. And, here in Rochester, GOP-sponsored "doom and gloom" advertisements seem to be outnumbering those by the Democrats. They're even branding a candidate as an out-of-touch millionaire (how much, exactly, is in the bank accounts of Bush and Cheney?). It has been another entertaining round of election tactics. But, again, I'm ready for them to end. If we could only end advertising and replace the advertisements with debates....

GOP Election Tactics

As the election draws near, the GOP is beginning to look a little desperate. Their attempt to tie candidates to Nancy Pelosi seems like a surprisingly weak tactic. As much as I'd like to believe America is filled with people who know tons of officials, I suspect the odds of those they are trying to appeal to knowing much about her are slim to none. In Rochester, the GOP is sponsoring ads against two congressional candidates because they mentioned there might be a need to raise the social security age at some point. That's quite a change in stance given what the party was pumping for social security not that long ago. But, I suspect their tactics on social security will be far more effective than the Pelosi tactic. Then, of course, there is the beating of a dead horse on Kerry misreading his jab at Bush. It was an unfortunate mistake, but, let's be honest, President Bush has books on his slip ups. Plus, President Bush helped the Democrats that day by proclaiming Rumsfeld's job is safe for the next two years.

This leads me to ponder whether the GOP has lost some of its savvy when it comes to election strategy? While I'm not terribly impressed with what they're doing, I'm not sure the DNC is capitalizing on everything that it could be either. Additionally, even GOP supporters have to concede that they have a little less to work with this year. So, we'll see what unfolds during this final stretch run and then we'll have a concrete answer to this question.