A little more than a year ago I sat in a lecture hall listening to a British professor give a lecture while I was jetlaged and most of my classmates were asleep. Though I was close to dosing, I'll never forget part of his lecture where he basically said: "We (meaning the Brits) were at the top, and then you (the Americans) surged to the top after World War II and became the super power, and some day you'll be in the same situation...China is coming up fast."
Both Obama and McCain mention China and I can't help the chill that goes through my bones thinking: the transition is already underway.
Energy, Health Insurance, Taxes, ... McCain, answer the question. Points for Obama there.
However, McCain did better than he has been doing. The mortgage idea was new. Though idealistically bailing every American's mortgage and revaluing them so that person can stay in their house sounds great, I have no faith in the plan, and in actuality I have little to no faith in either candidate.
Regardless of their promises our system of government just isn't built that way. Our forfathers built the system based on a seperation of powers. Last April I wrote a 30 page thesis on this. Anyway, here are two notable quotes from Jeff Fisher, author of "Presidents and Promises," that I'd like to share.
“If candidates claim they can actually achieve what they promise, discount their claims by whatever you know about the following: Congress; interest group power in Washington, “Cabinet government” and White House staff behavior; the executive branch and federal judiciary; state and local government; the Democratic or Republican party; a mixed but still market-based economy; the international economic and political system; unforeseen future events and crises; the candidates’ demonstrated ability in forging governing, not electoral, coalitions; and the next presidential election.”
In Fisher's book he also notes that one of President Carter's most senior advisors said:
"Presidents should never promise anything to anybody. I would like to see promises banned from presidential campaigns. Stu Eizenstat and I worked on him for weeks back in 1976, trying to persuade him not to be specific about promising to create a Department of Education. He wouldn’t listen. So we got broadsided by Reagan for the “bureaucraticness in Washington” because we created Cabinet-level departments like the Department of Education that mattered only to a few people at the NEA [National Education Association.] The same is true for most of our other promises. All we got was a lot of grief from the press for being naïve in making them, or interest groups who should have been our supporters but spent most of the time demagoguing us for not doing enough, the NEA, incidentally, is an exception. They were usually good and loyal friends. My general point is still right. Campaign promises are poison. "
So cynicism might have won the best of me, but I sure hope it loses in the bigger battle. I'd love to be proven wrong.
*Picture by Steven Crowley
New York Times
