Why I'm voting for Obama, on his own terms

Why I voted for Obama

I recently heard from a friend who has been thinking about voting for Obama, which is not the common viewpoint in her red state. She's interested in why vote FOR Obama, which gets drowned out in the loud choruses of why to vote AGAINST the other guy. So I'm attempting to answer that question by itself, with a few failures, I'm afraid.

#1) Health Care. This is the biggest one of all. The US has attempted SO many times in the last few decades to reform health care. Nixon tried to implement a system more liberal than the one Obama passed. Carter and Clinton tried, and failed. Obama has finally gotten something that is, in the opinion of my doctor friends and relatives, a step in the right direction. It's not perfect, it's complex, but it's a good step in the right direction. We need Obama to stay president for four more years to let this new health care policy come fully into implementation. If it's bad, the Democrats will lose in 2016 and the Republicans will repeal it. But if it gets repealed in a few months, we'll never know if this approach would have worked and it will be decades before enough momentum gets around health care to try reform again.

You can't just keep the popular aspects of the plan, that will be too expensive. This plan has the hope of finally pushing health care costs down. We need to let that happen.

#2) People not in power. Women, African Americans, Latinos, Gays, Lesbians, Poor. ALL these groups prefer Obama by huge margins. And I mean huge. Add the Sick to the list, too, as they benefit greatly from Obama's health care plans, and can get insurance now, even with preexisting conditions. I've found that when you are puzzled about something and can't decide, it's best to look to those who are not in power, not strong, not dominant, and see what they say. Somehow, these groups see things a bit more for what they are; they see through the smoke and mirrors that was going on during the first presidential debate; they know not only what will work better for them, but for others like them and the country as a whole. The only powerful demographic that favors Obama is the very well educated, but that is a point in his favor too.

#3) Economy. Obama inherited an awful situation and he's presided over the country and things have gotten better. It's been slow and painful, but it's gotten better. Jobs are being added, especially in the private sector, and unemployment is below 8% now for the first time in quite a while. It's worth it to let this vision move forward a bit longer to see if it really is working. Besides (here we go), much of the job losses that get pegged to Obama (as if he is the one hiring and firing), are from local and state government jobs being shuttered under (mostly) Republican governors and congresses slashing their budgets back too quickly. Then they blame Obama for this.

#4)Foreign Policy. I believe that Obama walks a very tight line between asserting American interests abroad without getting into "America is the best, everyone do what we say." As someone who has lived abroad several times, we quickly lose sight of the fact that this is how the world sees us. George Bush lacked this skill and got the US into two wars, the second on completely false pretenses. Obama uses his brain when it comes to foreign policy and isn't afraid to take a nuanced approach; he doesn't believe this looks weak, as the neoconservative crowd would have us believe. And while president (again, he didn't do it, but under his watch), the Arab Spring took place, which is a huge sign of hope in the Middle East. (Here I go again) Romney's stance on Iran as he has campaigned is very frightening and similar to George Bush's.

Downside for Obama: his extended use of drones and assassinations with them are very discouraging. He knows more than I do, but their use seems excessive to me.

#5)Energy/Environment. Obama seems to understand that the way of the future is renewable energy, not doubling down on oil and coal. He understands, if not quite able to do something about it, that fossil fuels contribute to global warming, and that this is a real issue. He believes the EPA should be active (not dismantled) in caring for our environment. He believes that the National Science Foundation should be funding environmental scientific research.

#6)Taxes. Obama does not buy into the theory that cutting taxes will result in a boost to the economy. If this were true, where is the giant economic boost after George Bush's big tax cuts? It didn't exist. In fact, it contributed to the economic collapse, as people took their tax cuts and funneled them into what?
a) creating jobs b) buying more stuff and making the economy go vroooooom! c) into iffy investments looking for quick returns?

Ah, the answer is C. All that money got added to the already precarious housing bubble and it eventually broke, sending the entire world economy with it. There was no housing bubble in Canada. Their regulations of banks prevented it (banks have to keep much more of their loans on hand in cash there), and taxes are higher there (so there was no big rush of new cash to send the bubble up more). Obama would be open to ending the tax cuts for the wealthy who make more than $250,000 per year, and this is a reasonable approach to taxes. Eventually all the tax cuts should end, but not during the sort of recovery we are in now.

Romney wants to double-down on tax cuts, cutting 20% off the rate for everyone. That sounds fair, but it's only because it's his phrasing. In dollars, it amounts to $180Billion per year, of which about about $150B go to the top 5% of earners (my math and calculations, I am not repeating a party line here). Let's be clear here, if you are in the top 5% of earners, you are not experiencing a recession at all. Let's get some help from those who are before giving away boatloads of cash to those not really in recession.

My conclusion

I am an ecologist, and we study what happens to areas that have been disturbed, sometimes to the bare soil. First weeds come in, then some legumes that fix nitrogen from the air and add it to the soil, then early quick growing trees, pines here in the South, then eventually hard wood deciduous trees like oaks and hickory, perhaps followed by another slower growing set of maple and beech. I see governments and societies in much the same way. Governments start off as primitive and mostly working to keep basic order. As time progresses, they move into funding enterprises that are useful to society as a whole, but not profitable enough to drive private businesses into it. Clean water, public health, highways, trains, public transit, efficient utilities. As yet more time goes on, the social safety net becomes more important, and the government can afford it. As economies grow, managing that becomes more important. I believe we are on this trajectory, and that the left embraces it, welcoming the challenges that come with it with the benefits of a more developed society.

Some on the right love to say "we're becoming like Europe," and the implicit assumption is we need to go back to the good old days of no or low regulation, low taxes, and little safety net. They say we are becoming like Greece or Portugal. I say no, we are becoming more like Germany and England, two strong countries with strong economic engines and strong work ethics, just like the US. There is no going back to the "good old days" which weren't that good anyway. When health care is poor, a robust health care system and universal health care is not applicable. But when you have a system such as ours, you must provide care to everyone, and you must come up with a reasonable way for paying for it. These things cost money, and that is paid for with taxes, which has somehow become a swear word in the US despite the fact that our taxes are much lower than they generally have been here, and they are far lower than similar countries.