The mid-term political elections coming in November will determine where America is going in the next few years. It is likely, given the polling estimates, that our government will need to change directions in these turbulent economic times.
Presidential elections, held every four years, usually bring out many more voters than the off-year elections that follow them. Often, during the presidential elections, many new members of Congress get elected, on the president’s coattails. Two years later, when the turnout is generally much lower, some of those members lose their seats to the opposition party candidates.
We are in tough, challenging times. Because there is a lot of public frustration about the state of the economy, many independents, or “swing voters,” are expected to change sides, and vote for Republicans or independents, to replace Democratic incumbents.
To increase Democratic turnout, the administration is trying to energize college students and African American voters in key states and cities, to come out and vote for Democratic candidates, in the mid-term elections. Older people, independents and disenchanted Democrat voters are expected to support Republicans, costing the Democrats control of the House of Representatives. Polls predict that up to 50 Democratic seats are in jeopardy in the House. If this should happen, the House would go over to Republican control. In the Senate, Republicans could gain up to seven seats. This would leave the Democrats in control, but with a fragile majority, and an inability to overcome filibusters. If the Congress cannot pass the administration’s proposals, the big question is whether the federal government will function properly or will come to a stalemate until presidential elections in 2012. Given the huge economic problems facing our country, both political parties will have to compromise their positions, and cooperate with each other to resolve our issues, such as creating jobs, paying down the deficit, and dealing with managing the nation.
Unfortunately, we haven’t seen or heard much compromise or cooperation on either side, lately. Some campaigns are so negative that voters in those areas are telling their friends that they have to “hold their nose” and pick the “least worst” candidates. Whatever the outcomes of the elections, our national Congress will face major problems. Some of the key legislation passed into law this year is not acceptable to a majority of Americans. The new health care options and financial regulatory changes remain serious issues to business people, as does the proposed tax revisions. There is an undercurrent by mainstream Americans to revise or revoke some of the new laws. Prospective voters, across much of the political spectrum, put the need to solve the fiscal problems facing our country at the top of their list of reasons for how they were going to cast their ballots.
The tax-and-spend philosophy of the administration is considered too far from the mainstream to be acceptable. People want the federal budget to be slashed, not increased. They do not want their children and grandchildren to pay off our present debts.
Right now we are a nation at war, even if many of us do not see the value of our committing so much money and so many lives in Afghanistan and Iraq. But normally, in times of war, the government and its citizens have to learn to live with less, not more.
What is true of our federal government is true of our state and local governments, as well. Most of them are deeply in debt, because of overspending. States and local government float bonds, which taxpayers often approve because they forget they must be paid off someday. Most state pension funds do not have enough money vested in them to fully meet their obligations, either.
We have become so used to borrowing against future earnings, as the government does, that the average household now owes 125 percent of its assets. That means that most people are in hock. We all need to learn to live on what we have.
Government must set the pace on fiscal prudency. Each level of government must be more frugal, by cutting expenses on less needed services and personnel, and eliminating costly programs, in order to meet budgets.
And the rest of us need to make good choices in the mid-term elections, for people who will bring our budgets under control.
— Bernard Featherman is a business columnist and past president of the Biddeford-Saco Chamber of Commerce. He can be reached by e-mail: bernard@featherman.com.
Comments are not available on this story.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
