The Barking RINO                           Essay 11

Readers of this column will already know that it is my supposition that internal debate is, at least at this stage of our political landscape, more effective than external debate. In other words, being critical of your own political platform, in the effort to vet proposals and thus put forward and achieve better ideas is a more effective method to get project ‘good’ ideas onto the political landscape.

In our current political landscape, the media has a vested interest creating schisms. By employing bias into their reporting, media outlets can assure an income stream based upon an audience size of sycophantic followers…or ‘true believers.’ While this works quite well for the media, as the assumed fourth leg of government, such an overt bias does little to stimulate effective debate which works towards much needed efficiency and inclusion in governmental operations. When one’s loyalty is based upon implicit agreement, debate dies and the search for truth is lost to the pursuit of advertising dollars. For example, when was the last time someone yelled and belittled you so effectively that you agreed with them? I don’t think it happens. So we know that Diana Mutz’s theory on media bias perpetuates schisms and abets the myth of a divided America. (Mutz and Reeves, The New Videomalaise: Effects of Televised Incivility on Political Trust 2005) (Mutz, Effects of "In-Your'Face" Telvision Discourse on Perceptions of a Legitimate Opposition 2007) (M. P. Fiorina, The Great Divide 1991) (M. P. Fiorina, Congress,Keystone to the Washington Establishment, 2nd ed 1989) (M. Fiorina 2011) (M. Fiorina, Conversations on Religion in American Life November) (Abrahms 2007).

Some of the questions that Republicans might want to debate include: in a time of an on-going annual budget deficit and a national debt that exceeds $17 trillion dollars, does it make sense for the American military budget to continue to represent nearly 50% of the world’s military budget? Can we sustain an economy where government payment of benefits coupled with an inequality in the income tax base, perpetuates annual debt and seemingly endless cycle of borrowing? If we can foresee the retirement of Baby Boomers but know that, for the most part, they have woefully under-saved for their retirement, should we simply ignore the issue? Finally, how serious should a candidate be taken who promises tax cuts, increased military spending AND a balanced budget?

Even a cursory examination of popular conservative campaign rhetoric indicates that party platform goals do not align. Simply stated, if the effectiveness and efficiency of government and the seemingly unlimited nature of government intrusion are causes for legitimate concern, why on earth do we continue to give a consensual pass to candidates that we know are telling us what we want to hear at the expense of both our future and the messages that we need to hear? We are, in essence, complicit in perpetuating bad government simply because we lack the political courage to be critical of our own bad examples.

In 1993-1994 Canada enacted the ‘budget triumph.’ This action stated that for every seven dollars in cuts of government expenditures they would raise taxes by one dollar. By 1997 they had lowered debt as a percent of GDP by 38% and balanced the budget for eleven consecutive years (Makings 2010). While raising taxes is anathema to conservative politics, it will be the honest Statesman that creates the forum in which we honestly debate ‘what is the role of our government?’ We now know the day has arrived when America can no longer afford to borrow from others in order to achieve both “guns and butter.” Simply arithmetic demonstrates that it is foolish to suggest only cutting government expenditures can lead to a balanced budget. Honest political debate is needed so that leadership can develop that has the authority and ability and can make us go where we need to go, rather than current leadership which lead us to where we want to go. The ability to win elections by being honest is being stymied by a lack of honest debate which leads to the pursuit of real world solutions to issues which we all know need to be addressed. The ineffectiveness of government is not caused by partisan opposition; it is caused by listening to that fellow in the mirror who so comfortably lies to us and allows us to blame another while we shirk our own advice at the expense of this nation’s great future.

Suggested Reading and Listening:

Abrahms, Samuel. "Culture War? Exposing Myth of Red vs Blue States." National Public Radio. October 27, 2007. http://www.npr.org/books/authors/138440248/morris-p-fiorina (accessed December 27, 2014).

Fiorina, Morris. "Conversations on Religion in American Life." National Public Radio. 13 2004 , November. http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=4168707&m=4168708 (accessed December 27, 2014).

—. "Finding the Cure for Pendulum Politics." National Public Radio . November 13, 2011. http://www.npr.org/2011/11/13/142288879/finding-the-cure-for-pendulum-politics (accessed December 27, 2014).

Fiorina, Morris P. Congress,Keystone to the Washington Establishment, 2nd ed. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989.

—. "The Great Divide." The Washington Monthly, December 1991: 53 - 55.

Heclo, Hugh. "Hyperdemocracy." The Wilson Quaterly, 1999: 62 - 71 .

Heclo, Hugh. "Issue Networks and the Executive Establishment." In The New American Political System, by Anthony King, 87 - 124. Washington D.C. : American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, 1978.

Makings, Emily. "Lessons from Canada." Washington Research Council. October 10 , 2010. http://researchcouncil.org/2010/10/07/lessons-from-canada/ (accessed December 27, 2014).

Mutz, Diana C. "Effects of "In-Your'Face" Telvision Discourse on Perceptions of a Legitimate Opposition." American Political Science Review, 2007: 621 - 635.

Mutz, Diana C., and Byron Reeves. "The New Videomalaise: Effects of Televised Incivility on Political Trust." American Political Science Review (American Political Science Review), 2005: 1 - 15.