I've gotten a good number of e-mail forwards this week about politics, most of them trying to sway my vote on way or another. I'm sure I'm not the only one.
Some people have asked me why I am voting how I am, so I will spill it here. Ignore this post if you are all fired up over politics or sick of hearing about it. (I have been enjoying all the political banter between people, so I am going to milk it while I can.)
A few things to mention before I begin -
First, let me say I'm an independent. My presidential vote happens to land on the Democratic side this round, but my overall ballot swings both ways and generally always has. (By the way, there is a short political typology test
here if anyone is interested in checking out how their views line up with different US parties.)
Second, let me say I am sincerely impressed with Obama (as if you hadn't figured that out yet), and yes, I'm biased. But at the same time, I'm not totally black and white, and I know Obama has faults and McCain isn't all bad. In fact, I don't have terribly much against McCain other than I just simply don't agree with many of his policies, and I don't feel his vp candidate is ready for office.
Third, if you wonder where I am getting my statistics and facts, I'll tell you. =) The source is either cited in text in the blog, and if it's not, then it means I am pulling the fact from various sociology textbooks - namely
Crisis in American Institutions and
Social Inequality: Forms, Causes and Consequences. Both are
excellent reads and I would highly recommend them to anyone. (You don't have to say it, I know I'm a total geek for recommending textbooks for leisure reading.)
So now that you have my full disclaimers, here we go:
Morally, many people side with McCain for abortion/gay marriage issues. Regarding gay marriage, I honestly don't know if homosexuality is right/wrong or somewhere in between, and I really don't care if I never figure that out. What I do know, however, is that I firmly believe every US citizen should have the same legal rights. Currently, homosexuals do not have the same freedoms as heterosexuals. For example, things like hospital visitation rights, being added to a healthcare plan, or filing joint taxes. I don't feel a need to "protect" marriage. My marriage is holy and sacred all by itself and I don't need to dictate someone else's love life in order to keep it that way. (And secondly, if we really want to "protect" marriage, here's a novel idea - uphold your commitment and stop getting divorced.)
Regarding abortion, I think it's wrong, and especially during late term, I think it's cruel. But I also think it's complicated in most situations and I also think that having it be totally illegal would create major health risks because people would try to have abortions illegally and unsafely. I don't have the answer for abortion rights and I don't think Republicans or Democrats will ever have a good answer either. I think generally, women facing that decision will do the best they can with what they have and what they know.
Financially, I like Obama's plan and I
really don't like hearing John McCain say that corporations are paying record high taxes. In reality, US corporations today have one of the lowest tax rates in the history of the nation. For example, if corporations paid the same tax rate today that they paid in the 50's, then tax payments to the US Treasury would be $380 billion higher than they are right now. There are insane amounts of loopholes that allow corporations to avoid paying taxes, and believe me, they take advantage of everyone of them.
Healthcare, I like the starts of Obama's plan. I like that you would be able to choose public or private. I like that everyone can be covered. I know in this area, some people are saying he's socialist or what not. But he has said that he knows America could not operate on a socialist health care plan. The other concern is that it would end up costing too much to offer this coverage to everyone. But, when the Canadian government converted to 100% socialized healthcare, their total healthcare costs actually
declined, and beyond that Obama's plan isn't even socialist. He's simply providing an alternative to those who may be having trouble getting private insurance. And McCain's plan? I don't see it functioning for the long term. Taxing health benefits? A $5000 break? That's like putting a bandaid on a brain tumor. I've lived without health insurance and I know what it's like to pay for stuff out of pocket or to wait to go to the doctor until you feel really, really crappy because you don't know how you'll afford it. And trust me, from that standpoint, Obama's plan is looking a whole lot better.
Trade - I like Obama's caution and consideration of all factors. I feel like McCain really puts profits ahead of everything else. An example of this came about in the last debate. Columbia was McCain's example of choice regarding free trade. He spouted all the benefits of it and implied that Obama was a naive young pup who doesn't know a thing about trade because he has stated that he is not all for a free trade agreement with Columbia. On the surface, McCain's argument makes sense because trade seems to simply be about economics and world allies. But if you look deeper, it has really heavy human rights ramifications. There is so much screwed up stuff happening in Columbia with US corporations paying paramilitary groups to kill people (workers) who threaten the bottom line of profits by wanting to unionize, etc. (I'm looking at you Chiquita bananas!!!) If we just sign this free trade agreement, in many ways, we are telling the world "profit before humanity", "our own interests come before anything else", "money matters more than lives". And certainly, especially with America's current global reputation, we don't need more of that message sent. As such, I don't think it's a bad thing when Obama is cautious to sign a deal that has major human rights flaws. It's ironic really to me, because all along, Obama has been criticized for a lack of foreign policy experience, but when I listen to them, it seems that Obama has a more proper worldview as far as consideration of all aspects instead of just economic or military ramifications. Obama has also been active in support for Darfur, which obviously, hits close to my heart. I like that he seems eager to want to restore America's global identity through diplomacy, and I feel like we are in dire need of that, as most of the world hates us.
The rest of the issues regarding foreign policy and economics are probably too clouded in my mind. I have a very distinct world view about inequality and capitalism, and I know I'm very biased in that. So the rest of this is more my personal view than objectively looking at issues.
I don't believe there is a "free market" and I don't believe there is "equal opportunity". For example, over 80% of black people would have to move if we were to completely desegregate our neighborhoods in America. And how are school districts largely funded? Property tax. Which means, with large concentrations of blacks in poor urban areas, the schools located in those areas will also be poorly funded. Which means not all kids receive the same education. Which means their general life chances are different. One kid grows up having access to computers and up to date textbooks while the other is using outdated books and has no technology at his school. Which one do you think will get accepted into college? This is an example of what I mean when I say that America is not "equal opportunity" or that there is no "free market". The reality is, some people have better chances than others at making a good life. Hard work doesn't always pay off.
There is a huge myth in American that poor people are lazy and it's their own fault. Yet, empirical research shows that people on welfare largely prefer work to welfare, and the majority of those receiving welfare are indeed working. Welfare scams are the exception to the rule, not the norm. (This citation is both thanks to my text, plus numerous other places. One interesting article online is
here.)
I by and large believe that inequality is a result of the structure of our social institutions, not the result of individual character or work ethic. And here's the thing, when you travel globally (outside of business), your life changes. Things aren't simple anymore. You see the poverty and the crap and you suddenly realize that you are a part of the cause and you realize that it's not about being a world power anymore, and it's not about being an economic leader anymore. And humanity is infinitely more connected than you ever realized.
Here's an example of what I'm talking about with different world views - our friend, Rex, in the Philippines, literally grew up on a trash dump called Smokey Mountain. A few years ago, the government there did some sort of land grant and built "condo" type places for the people who were living on the landfill. Now, Rex and his family live in a one room "condo", sleep on the cement floor at night with a few cardboard boxes, and just generally struggle with paying for food or other necessities. Recently, we received an e-mail from him. He wanted to write us to make sure that we were okay because he had heard about the economic crisis in the States and he was worried about us. Experiences like that make all these giant abstract ideas like "free trade" suddenly personal. It's people just like Rex who are affected by trade agreements or by what we as individuals buy when we go to the store. "Free trade" isn't always free to those on the other end.
In reality, our wealth means someone else's exploitation.
Which brings me to another point - many people criticize Obama for wanting to "spread the wealth" around or for wanting to "take from the rich and give to the poor". And, I'm sorry, but when I think about people like Rex, I can't help but think that that is exactly what this world needs. If me having a little less, or paying a little more for a t-shirt or for my groceries means someone like Rex has a fighting chance of decent living standards - things as basic as food, housing, and clean water, then give me less and charge me more. I don't see any issues with spreading wealth in order for basic human rights to be met - whether that be health care in America or food on the table in Africa. If those basic human needs are met globally, then by all means, deregulate, fight it out and let capitalism run its course. But if we are going to play that game, then let's at least make "free trade" truly free and ensure that people really do have equal opportunity.