An Independent's View

Because democrats and republicans are sure to impose their story line on the election results, I hope some of them will read this, and spread the word. Neither party appeals to me. Parties are legal conspiracies to gain electoral and regulatory power. That democrats and republicans have locked up election processes in every state is a sign of how far we are from free and open elections – it’s a lot easier to win elections and gain power if you only have one opponent. That’s why I vote for third parties and will keep doing so until there are viable alternatives to democrats and republicans.
I am hopeful about the tea party movement (TPM) – I see it as an organic, self-organizing, response of the people to current political choices: I too favor free markets, low taxes, less intrusive government, balanced budgets, and constitutional governance. The TPM perspective is about integrity of federal government processes, not specific policies except as they violate the integrity of the process. In a real sense the TPM is apolitical, relative to democrat and republican perspectives. There are so many examples of a lack of integrity in federal processes, it is hard to know what to address first. I think TPM members focused a lot of energy on taxes, overspending, and debt and deficit because their lives are shaped by family income, balancing debt and income, and making hard choices about what to buy – and they know the consequences of bad management of these processes. Deep down I think we all know that our country is on the cusp of an unpleasant future if we do not exercise credible restraint. On this, it is interesting to note that the federal government has some of the toughest accounting standards, as any business that has federal contracts knows. Yet these standards are not imposed on federal budgeting processes. It’s a case of do as I say not as I do. Let’s stop this by adopting commonly accepted accounting practices to all federal programs and federal budgeting processes. This will immediately reveal the true state of our deficit and debt problems. Because the problems that we have created for ourselves have come into being over time, we have to work ourselves out overtime. The incoming Speaker of the House has called for spending to be capped at 2008 levels. This is admirable, but insufficient. The federal budget must be balanced. There are two parts to process. First, federal income has to be capped at a fixed percentage of GDP (20% is a good figure because it permits support for national defense [4-5% of GDP] and popular social programs like social security and Medicare – if these programs are constructed and run properly). Second, spending must be limited to income. Both of these steps have to be instituted via statute or via constitutional amendment to ensure their effectiveness. These steps create the mechanism by which undesirable government programs are defunded and eliminated, and will incentivize efficiency – the only way to increase spending on a program is to find or create savings elsewhere. I have been fortunate in this recession and I am thankful. This good fortune makes me willing to endure too high taxes for a while to help those in need, but not to expand the entitlement state -- there is a difference between helping those in need in hard times and permanent, coerced, transfers of my income to others.
At the same time, I am also angry, and I trace my anger to two aspects of the health insurance reform process. First and foremost, I did not elect a congressional representative to put into law a mandate to buy health insurance. I communicated this to him, but he disregarded me and the will of the district. We just fixed the representative problem in the past election, but it will take years to undo the damage his vote has created, because nearly as odious (as the individual mandate) was the use of reconciliation to pass the health insurance reform bill. This abuse of legislative process will come back to haunt those who used it so, and I know in my heart the outcomes of such future abuses will not be pleasant. Somehow the legislative branches must preclude all future uses of reconciliation for such purposes. There is a reason the Senate is constructed as it is. Senate processes force deliberative and consensual decision making among the major forces at play in any issue. In the end, Senate processes offer the best protection of the rights of minority interests. Sometimes the minority interests are objectively correct, and their protection is important for the health of the nation.
I consider myself a thoughtful person, and my thoughts run this way. There is a new Congress coming. They have been sent a relatively clear signal. The country wants the Congress to engage in meaningful, fiscally responsible discussions about what to do to put the country right. I personally am able to be patient as long as I see steady progress in the right direction. At a minimum, the Congress, the Senate, and the President should know I will keep my eye on them and make my choices accordingly.