With the election still appearing to be a toss up between the two candidates, it is a good time to consider what the outcome of this election will mean for the country. Here are some insights into the two different futures for America.
It is largely speculated that Obama's second term will piggy back off his first and would be based more on the upkeep of his first term policies than it will on significant new legislation. Obama's second term would be largely restrained by the Republican House and Obama's main goal would probably be to protect and strengthen legislation passed during his first term, especially Obamacare. Some of Obama's original promises have been delivered such as healthcare reform and financial regulation, but others will prove difficult to steer through Congress. Obama has campaigned partially on his plans to reduce the deficit and cut spending and he also acknowledges the need for increased revenue which, in his second term, would come primarily from higher taxes for the wealthy. He also promises an increased commitment to alternative energy which would partially be delivered through higher gas mileage standards for auto companies.
Mitt Romney's possible presidency would have some unique challenges and promises as well. As President, Romney would have to balance the interests of conservatives and moderates in order to institute what he calls "real change." He would also have to deliver on his promise to repeal or at least moderate Obamacare since one of his main talking points this campaign has been the repeal of Obama's healthcare law. He may also follow some aspects of the Ryan budget and reform Medicare and reduce spending on entitlements. In the Supreme Court, enough conservative or at least right-leaning justices could be appointed by Romney to overturn or at least dampen the effects of Roe v. Wade, which is another major talking point of Romney's campaign. A Romney Administration would desire major tax cuts, but it is unclear how much power Romney would have on this issue given the huge deficit and lack of bipartisan support. If Romney becomes President, it is also likely that oil drilling in the US will increase more than it has under Obama.
A key to either Obama's or Romney's future presidencies will of course be some degree of bipartisan support. Otherwise, whoever becomes president will be largely immobilized and will have to resort to maneuvering outside of Congress.
3 comments:
I agree with Anthony that the next President of the United States will require bipartisan support to promote significant chance in the country, but then, all presidents usually require help from both parties. Personally, I would expect that both candidates would be quite restrained by Congress regardless of who is elected. Hopefully we do not get a deadlocked Congress for the next four years.
Regarding Obama, I feel that he would probably try to continue his original policies if reelected, such as with Obamacare. He would also have more flexibility after the election to deal with serious foreign policy issues, like deals with Putin. If he hopes to cut the deficit, he is going to have to try other policies because last time I checked, our deficit is still insanely high. As of 2012, the poorest American in the country would still be richer than the federal government (nobody I know has trillions of dollars of debt anyway).
Regarding Romney, I would definitely require serious bipartisan support to change Obamacare and Roe v. Wade. While I am uncertain about his budget plans I do believe that the Democrats would most certainly be uncooperative if he is elected. Oil drilling can help, especially with the rising gas prices in the area, but environmentalists will not be pleased.
Overall, I hope that the next president will be able to promote effective change in the country so that our economy and foreign policy will be improved. I feel that reducing the USA debt is an issue that rivals the economy, especially with our country owing trillions of dollars to foreign nations. Notably, Obama's plan to tax the wealthy to reduce the deficit does not seem effective. I doubt that taking away a few yachts from Bill Gates is going to save our country, and some analysts agree and disagree
In the end, we need to hope that the next four years will show improvement and further bipartisanship. However, As Harry S. Truman said: "Whenever a fellow tells me he's bipartisan, I know he's going to vote against me."
This election is at least partially flawed in that comparing Mitt Romney to President Barack Obama is like comparing apples to oranges. While there are several issues, such as the national economy, the national military budget, and healthcare where one can somewhat clearly contrast the policies of each candidate, there remain many stances on social issues voiced by each candidate that aren’t directly comparable, or aren’t there to compare. For example, I am still unclear as to what Governor Romney’s positions are concerning women’s rights. On the other hand, I have yet to hear a definitive answer from Mr. Obama describing exactly how he will help reduce the national deficit. It’s sad that voters may have to cast their ballot based on agreeing with a solution to one issue. In addition to difficult comparisons, there is a characteristic vagueness marking this election where I feel the American public is unsure as to how “closing tax loopholes” or “taxing the top 1%” will actually account for literally trillions of dollars needed to revitalize America. In all honesty, neither candidate’s policy will completely solve our debt. Neither Obama’s or Romney’s policy will make a difference that will instantaneously satisfy the American people, simply because the issue cannot be solved overnight. This election is about establishing precedents and implementing policies that, while maybe insignificant in right off the bat, will eventually provide America with reliable, systematic ways about dealing with taxes and healthcare, etc.
Post a Comment