By Richard N. Baldwin T / Hispanic Vista.com
There were some big changes that the voters imposed on the elected community nationwide on 2 November. One thing is for sure, the Democrats did not “get it”. This was so obvious in President Obama’s press conference the day after. But one thing not so obvious is whether the Republican Party fully understood what happened either. Now, let me make this clear, I wish them all of the luck possible to carry out meaningful changes, but there are some cautions to be aware of.
In reality, the winners fall into two groups; the “established” Republicans, and the new “freshman” Republicans. What remains to be seen is if the establishment will fully accept the newcomers as representatives of the voters.
And let’s face it, the established Republican history is not so hot either. They were a full partner of budget breaking deficit spending before Obama came along. Obama simply took this to a new quantum level.
The established Republicans should look at recent history in with we have seen three successive complete overturns from the party in power at the time. To the Republicans we should say, “Watch out, you may be next . . . again. W. C. Fields once said that he never had voted for anybody. He only voted against somebody. And that was, in fact, what the recent election was all about, a vote against those in power.
Now, the incoming Republicans have offered a “Pledge to America”. Well, a pledge is like a fancy promise, not a binding contract. Not even signatures, just promises. Do I believer ANY politician’s promise? Sure . . . when pigs fly.
But let’s look at what is missing from the “Pledge”:
Cutting back spending. There was a mention of this from the incoming Republican Speaker about cutting spending by one hundred billion each year. This is nothing. Even President Obama mentioned more than twice that. And that is still not enough. Nice to make vague promises, but the test is to get specific. What programs to cut and by how much? And this is where all of these past promises have failed in the past. And starting by cutting down the employment in the federal government may be a good start. But get specific.
Balanced budget amendment. Tried again and again with no success. México adopted this within the last twenty years and it has worked. One chamber sets the revenue budget and the other sets the spending budget. And spending cannot be more than 0.5% of revenue. Surprisingly, this has been working. If México can do this, why not the US?
Entitlement reform. This area, including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and ObamaCare represents almost two thirds of the entire federal budget. This is one big third rail that has to be dealt with. And will require a lot of political and fiscal courage.
Term limits. The Contract With America had this, but was quickly forgotten. And herein lies the roots of corruption. Here is where those long serving politicians loose contact with the people that they are supposed to represent and live in a completely disconnected society in Washington. I had to laugh at an article in one of the Washington newspapers bemoaning the loss of centuries of “experience” after the election. But these decades old service people were whom many of the voters wanted to get rid of. And I should point out that it was just this that triggered the Mexican revolution of 1910. A 24-year presidency along with unbelievable corruption set off a revolution that lasted years. This brought in the Mexican constitution a no reelection clause that, as one Mexican president said, “The constitution offers every Mexican the right to run for election, but not reelection”. The lesson here is that politicians do not give up power easily. Let’s hope that it won’t take a revolution to do this in Washington.
Earmarks. Left out of the “Pledge”. And with the comment by the Republican leadership that the earmark issue “has been solved.” Whom are you kidding? Not that this is a really big thing financially with only 1% of the federal budget in earmarks. But the public is sick and tired of seeing their tax dollars financing the careers of embedded politicians. And in the history of earmarks, the performance in both parties is about even.
Immigration. Again, we have a split between many of the “establishment” Republicans and the “freshman” Republicans. This is the elephant in the living room. We now have the largest minority consisting of the Hispanic population. And they are not “block” voters. Note that a number of Hispanic Republicans have come into the congress in the last election. One poll put a Republican vote percentage of 35% of the Hispanic vote. And it should be recognized that at least two aspiring Republican contenders met their demise in the last election by outraging the Hispanic voters. For one, was the Whitman illegal maid episode. Yes, Whitman had no choice but to discharge the maid when it was revealed that she was illegal. But Whitman didn’t have to let the maid, who was “almost a member of the family” hanging out to dry. She could have offered legal help to the maid to try and straighten out her problem. I worked for an employer in Chicago that discovered the same thing about a valued worker. He hired a lawyer and the worker was able to work out his problem with the INS and continue his valued service to the company. But Whitman simply threw the maid under the bus. And there was Angle’s last minute barrage of extremely racist ads in the tight race for Senator in Nevada. And she lost. The establishment Republicans are going to have to deal with this problem, the result of years of ignoring the issue by both parties going all the way back to the Reagan administration.
Treating the immigration problem like the “Yellow Peril” of the early 20th century isn’t a viable solution.
Like I said, the Republicans have an opportunity.
For the good of all, don’t blow it this time.
Richard N. Baldwin T., a HispanicVista.com (www.hispanicvista.com) contributing columnist, lives in Tlalnepantla, Edo de México. E-mail at: [email protected]