Sunday, September 14, 2008
Candidates and their parties
Christian Trejbal
Recent columns
- Baptists might leave downtown Blacksburg
- A theater rises between town and campus
- Making sense of local elections
- Voters have only themselves to blame
From the RoundTable blog
Barack Obama and Sarah Palin -- is John McCain even running anymore? -- were not the only things to come out of their parties' national conventions. Democrats and Republicans also ratified party platforms, but no one seems to care.
Informed voters should at least skim through them.
They contain plenty of platitudes. Both were the result of "the most open process" ever. Both want to reach out to independents and members of the other party. Both want to change the way government works.
They contain moments of pitiful self-denial. "The other party wants to continue pork barrel politics; [Republicans] are disgusted by it, no matter who practices it." Really? Have Palin and her most-federally-subsidized-in-the-nation Alaskans get back to everyone on that.
They also contain incongruities and contradictions. Democrats plan to spend billions on energy rebates, economic stimulus, investing in green energy and education. Then they promise to cut taxes for most households. And finally, they will balance the budget. With what? Magic beans?
Beneath the fluff, the platforms contain real policy positions that reveal much. As elections approach, voters have a right to ask candidates if they agree.
If Democratic Rep. Rick Boucher stops by the New River Valley this election season even though he has not even drawn an opponent, put these brain teasers to him.
>Your party's platform does not mention nuclear power. Do you think nuclear power has a place in a comprehensive energy package?
>Do you agree "Social Security is not in crisis"?
>Is global climate change really "the planet's greatest threat"?
>Do you "strongly and unequivocally support Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay"?
>Should Washington "raise the minimum wage and index it to inflation"?
The party platforms apply to state lawmakers, too. If Del. David Nutter knocks at your door next year pretending to be a moderate despite all evidence to the contrary, ask him how much of the Republican platform he backs.
>Do you "support English as the official language in our nation"?
>Should there be a law "prohibiting gambling over the Internet"?
>Your party considers "discrimination based on sex, race, age, religion, creed, disability or national origin to be immoral." Democrats add ethnicity, language, sexual orientation and gender identity to that list. Do you think it is moral to discriminate against Hispanics, French speakers, gays and lesbians?
Your thoughts
Boucher, Nutter and every other politician will disagree with portions of the platforms. They will protest that the official party doctrine does not bind them. Then, when they arrive in Washington or Richmond, they will back leaders who will strive mightily to impose the platforms on America.
Boucher might support nuclear power. Does Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi? Nutter might think it is OK to conduct government business in languages other than English. Does House Majority Leader Morgan Griffith?
That is the terrifying truth of the platforms. Even if individual politicians oppose particular planks, the heart of the party, the people who will control the debate and decide what really gets done, support nearly every bit of the insanity.
Christian Trejbal is an editorial writer for The Roanoke Times based in the New River Valley bureau in Christiansburg.
