I have thought about this editorial for a long time. It is a topic that weighs heavy on my heart and I have delayed writing it because I am afraid I will not do it justice. The nature of this subject requires a much more eloquent writer. With that said, I will ask for permission to speak freely. Look past my inability to give the topic justice and give thought to the subject I am trying to elevate.
In 1983, the seminal report on the nation’s failing education system stated that America suffered from the “soft bigotry of low expectations.” In other words we had given up on certain segments of our society’s ability to learn. That was true then for our nation and it is true today for our local community. That hurts.
Before you react to that raw statement, consider these facts.
According to the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and the CRCT testing, our community’s schools perform at or near the state average. At first blush, that would be acceptable. We are finally testing at the state average. The problem is that by virtually every standard, our state is at the bottom in educational performance.
I am not going to bore you with countless study after study that shows America’s educational performance is at the bottom of the industrialized nations and our state is at the bottom of America’s performance.
That should disturb and challenge every one of us. Why are we content to perform at the state average of one of the worst performing states in the country? Why don’t we expect more from our schools and students?
This complacency is well known to our education establishment.
Several years ago, I met with Dr. Ed Smith, our previous school superintendent. As we discussed the challenges he faced, he made a statement that was shocking in its honesty and consequences.
He stated that due to No Child Left Behind (NCLB) testing requirements, the school system had to adapt the curriculum to ensure the highest probability to achieve success per the measures established by NCLB and the state. In doing so, he stated that the schools would have to go it alone. In other words, they could not count on the parents to be an integral part of a child’s education. They did not have time to involve the parents.
Wow, that is a damning statement. The schools cannot count on the parents to be an integral part of the child’s education. How can that be? Was Dr. Smith crazy? Was he wrong?
I don’t think so. Of course there are parents who are involved and their child can get a good education in Troup county. However, this is the exception rather than the norm.
On a systemic basis our schools turn out students who will perform poorly by objective, national and international standards. Far too many will be educated to the level of a fast-food clerk not to the standards needed to function in today’s global information or manufacturing society.
Why does this happen? Because, as a community, we don’t care. We have low expectations of our students and in turn the teachers and the school system. I know we are a blue-collar community, but that does not excuse our general lack of parental involvement in our schools. We make time for football, baseball, hunting, etc. What effort do we make to help children excel in our schools?
I know this is hard to face. But ask yourself this question? Why do so many transfers to our community choose to live elsewhere? Simple – education. They see a school system that churns out burger flippers rather than college graduates or technicians. They see other communities were education is at the core of the community’s identity. When given a choice, they choose to live elsewhere.
LaGrange (Troup) is America’s Greatest Little City. I love that bumper sticker. I love our sense of pride. I love the fact that Wednesdays are still slower than other days so presumably we can go to church that evening. I love the sense of community around our parks and recreation facilities that teach teamwork and sportsmanship to all children. I love our commitment to maintaining a vibrant downtown. These traits set us apart from other communities.
However, the same cannot be said of our community’s commitment to educating all of our children, not just the few whose parents take an active interest.
We are average at best in a below average state. We do not live up to the bumper sticker in that regard. As a community, do we really aspire to be great in education? If not, we perpetuate the bigotry of low expectations our children and our community will suffer from it.
If you have any comments or have a desire to make us great in education, contact me at jkirkhancock@yahoo.com. Maybe we can get something started.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Tuesday, August 09, 2011
Don't Shoot the Messenger
According to the polls (and the Democrats), it looks like many Americans think the Tea Party is to blame for the S&P downgrade. That would be like blaming Paul Revere for the Revolutionary War. All the Tea Party did was seize on the debt ceiling debate and educate the American people and Congress on the growing size of our government and debt.
S&P knew the debt was growing too fast. That is why they wanted a $4-$6 trillion dollar reduction in spending. After bringing the country to the edge of default, all this President and Congress could muster was a trillion and a special committee. Thank God Paul Revere was more successful when he raised the alarm so many years ago.
President Obama originally wanted no cuts and a clean extension beyond the election. Congress has been unable to rein in spending. Do you really think we would have started the war on debt and spending had it not been for the Tea Party?
We did not defeat the British on the night of Paul Revere’s ride, but a few years later our nation won its independence. Let’s hope we can do it again.
Kirk Hancock
Whitesville Road, LaGrange
Letter to the editor - LDN
Monday, July 25, 2011
What the Republicans Can Still Learn from Reagan
The ideal Republican candidate for president would be divorced, a former governor of a liberal state, allow amnesty for millions of illegal aliens, a card carrying member of the Hollywood elite and heresy of all heresy, approve tax increases. Of course I am talking about the patron saint of the modern Republican Party, Ronald Reagan.
Reagan and the great saints of the church have become mere idols rather than authentic role models. How many people really understand why the early church elevated certain followers to sainthood? How many can tell you of the brilliance of St. Augustine or the compassion of St. Francis? To the extent most people know of them, they have been reduced to simple icons and have lost all depth and meaning of what really elevated them to sainthood.
I would argue we have done the same to the political genius that was Ronald Reagan. He is much more than an icon portrayed by so many in the Republican Party and the talk show network. He was a man of deeply held principles and yes, he was even a darn good politician. These two attributes are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are critical and it is paramount that the modern Republican Party recognize this fact if it want to effectively govern and lead the nation.
A member of Congress who merely has convictions or principles is little more than a clanging gong. All the right convictions coupled with the inability to sway others is useless in the political process. The congressperson might be good for exciting sound bites or TV punditry but they are ill suited for political effectiveness. Now don’t get me wrong. Convictions are the bedrock of any good politician. Reagan had them and everyone who came into contact with him knew he had them.
Reagan had several core principles that shaped his political philosophy. These convictions were: belief in the individual rather than groups, a smaller and less intrusive federal government and an undeniable sense of optimism about America’s exceptionalism and its future. In addition he was a big tent Republican. He sought to include as many people as possible into his political world view. He evidenced this by his famous statement that ‘if somebody agrees with me 80% of the time, that doesn't make him my enemy.” Reagan would work with the modern day Republican In Name Only (RINO’s) and blue dog democrats. These are (or should be) the core principles that drive the Republican Party today.
However, convictions are not enough. Just like a monk isolated on a mountain top monastery, the best ideals without the ability to influence those around you are a waste. Saint Reagan was an effective politician not only because of his convictions but due to the fact he did not stay on the mountain top. He entered the fray of politics in California and Washington. He was the most effective Republican president in generations, if not all time. He was not held hostage by his convictions, rather he used them to drive the political process. He consistently moved the nation closer his core beliefs one step at a time. Sometimes he even took a step back to take two steps forward. That is the essence of politics.
Remember, Reagan is not a simple icon or a medallion to hang around your neck. He was the consummate politician. He was so successful that Bill Clinton, the patron saint of the modern Democratic Party was forced to declare “the era of big government is over”. Reagan won, clear and simple. He had won the hearts and minds of the American people.
He did it by sticking to his convictions AND compromising along the way. Today’s Republicans and many in the Tea Party have much to learn from this. The nation is split. The fact that the Republicans think the other half of the country is flat-out wrong does not matter. The genius of our government is it follows the collective will of the people not those with the most passion or loudest voices. As long as the nation is split the Republicans will be unable to significantly achieve their goals. This does not mean that they quit trying; it just means they will have to get big and small victories whenever and where ever they can.
The Republicans need to win the majority of the hearts and minds of the American people. They do this by adopting and implementing the principles and political philosophy of the real, not sanctified, Ronald Reagan.
LaGrange Daily News 7.21.11
Reagan and the great saints of the church have become mere idols rather than authentic role models. How many people really understand why the early church elevated certain followers to sainthood? How many can tell you of the brilliance of St. Augustine or the compassion of St. Francis? To the extent most people know of them, they have been reduced to simple icons and have lost all depth and meaning of what really elevated them to sainthood.
I would argue we have done the same to the political genius that was Ronald Reagan. He is much more than an icon portrayed by so many in the Republican Party and the talk show network. He was a man of deeply held principles and yes, he was even a darn good politician. These two attributes are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are critical and it is paramount that the modern Republican Party recognize this fact if it want to effectively govern and lead the nation.
A member of Congress who merely has convictions or principles is little more than a clanging gong. All the right convictions coupled with the inability to sway others is useless in the political process. The congressperson might be good for exciting sound bites or TV punditry but they are ill suited for political effectiveness. Now don’t get me wrong. Convictions are the bedrock of any good politician. Reagan had them and everyone who came into contact with him knew he had them.
Reagan had several core principles that shaped his political philosophy. These convictions were: belief in the individual rather than groups, a smaller and less intrusive federal government and an undeniable sense of optimism about America’s exceptionalism and its future. In addition he was a big tent Republican. He sought to include as many people as possible into his political world view. He evidenced this by his famous statement that ‘if somebody agrees with me 80% of the time, that doesn't make him my enemy.” Reagan would work with the modern day Republican In Name Only (RINO’s) and blue dog democrats. These are (or should be) the core principles that drive the Republican Party today.
However, convictions are not enough. Just like a monk isolated on a mountain top monastery, the best ideals without the ability to influence those around you are a waste. Saint Reagan was an effective politician not only because of his convictions but due to the fact he did not stay on the mountain top. He entered the fray of politics in California and Washington. He was the most effective Republican president in generations, if not all time. He was not held hostage by his convictions, rather he used them to drive the political process. He consistently moved the nation closer his core beliefs one step at a time. Sometimes he even took a step back to take two steps forward. That is the essence of politics.
Remember, Reagan is not a simple icon or a medallion to hang around your neck. He was the consummate politician. He was so successful that Bill Clinton, the patron saint of the modern Democratic Party was forced to declare “the era of big government is over”. Reagan won, clear and simple. He had won the hearts and minds of the American people.
He did it by sticking to his convictions AND compromising along the way. Today’s Republicans and many in the Tea Party have much to learn from this. The nation is split. The fact that the Republicans think the other half of the country is flat-out wrong does not matter. The genius of our government is it follows the collective will of the people not those with the most passion or loudest voices. As long as the nation is split the Republicans will be unable to significantly achieve their goals. This does not mean that they quit trying; it just means they will have to get big and small victories whenever and where ever they can.
The Republicans need to win the majority of the hearts and minds of the American people. They do this by adopting and implementing the principles and political philosophy of the real, not sanctified, Ronald Reagan.
LaGrange Daily News 7.21.11
What the Republicans Can Learn from Reagan
The ideal Republican candidate for president would be divorced, a former governor of a liberal state, allow amnesty for millions of illegal aliens, a card carrying member of the Hollywood elite and heresy of all heresy, approve tax increases. Of course I am talking about the patron saint of the modern Republican Party, Ronald Reagan.
Reagan and the great saints of the church have become mere idols rather than authentic role models. How many people really understand why the early church elevated certain followers to sainthood? How many can tell you of the brilliance of St. Augustine or the compassion of St. Francis? To the extent most people know of them, they have been reduced to simple icons and have lost all depth and meaning of what really elevated them to sainthood.
I would argue we have done the same to the political genius that was Ronald Reagan. He is much more than an icon portrayed by so many in the Republican Party and the talk show network. He was a man of deeply held principles and yes, he was even a darn good politician. These two attributes are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are critical and it is paramount that the modern Republican Party recognize this fact if it want to effectively govern and lead the nation.
A member of Congress who merely has convictions or principles is little more than a clanging gong. All the right convictions coupled with the inability to sway others is useless in the political process. The congressperson might be good for exciting sound bites or TV punditry but they are ill suited for political effectiveness. Now don’t get me wrong. Convictions are the bedrock of any good politician. Reagan had them and everyone who came into contact with him knew he had them.
Reagan had several core principles that shaped his political philosophy. These convictions were: belief in the individual rather than groups, a smaller and less intrusive federal government and an undeniable sense of optimism about America’s exceptionalism and its future. In addition he was a big tent Republican. He sought to include as many people as possible into his political world view. He evidenced this by his famous statement that ‘if somebody agrees with me 80% of the time, that doesn't make him my enemy.” Reagan would work with the modern day Republican In Name Only (RINO’s) and blue dog democrats. These are (or should be) the core principles that drive the Republican Party today.
However, convictions are not enough. Just like a monk isolated on a mountain top monastery, the best ideals without the ability to influence those around you are a waste. Saint Reagan was an effective politician not only because of his convictions but due to the fact he did not stay on the mountain top. He entered the fray of politics in California and Washington. He was the most effective Republican president in generations, if not all time. He was not held hostage by his convictions, rather he used them to drive the political process. He consistently moved the nation closer his core beliefs one step at a time. Sometimes he even took a step back to take two steps forward. That is the essence of politics.
Remember, Reagan is not a simple icon or a medallion to hang around your neck. He was the consummate politician. He was so successful that Bill Clinton, the patron saint of the modern Democratic Party was forced to declare “the era of big government is over”. Reagan won, clear and simple. He had won the hearts and minds of the American people.
He did it by sticking to his convictions AND compromising along the way. Today’s Republicans and many in the Tea Party have much to learn from this. The nation is split. The fact that the Republicans think the other half of the country is flat-out wrong does not matter. The genius of our government is it follows the collective will of the people not those with the most passion or loudest voices. As long as the nation is split the Republicans will be unable to significantly achieve their goals. This does not mean that they quit trying; it just means they will have to get big and small victories whenever and where ever they can.
The Republicans need to win the majority of the hearts and minds of the American people. They do this by adopting and implementing the principles and political philosophy of the real, not sanctified, Ronald Reagan.
LaGrange Daily News 7.21.11
Reagan and the great saints of the church have become mere idols rather than authentic role models. How many people really understand why the early church elevated certain followers to sainthood? How many can tell you of the brilliance of St. Augustine or the compassion of St. Francis? To the extent most people know of them, they have been reduced to simple icons and have lost all depth and meaning of what really elevated them to sainthood.
I would argue we have done the same to the political genius that was Ronald Reagan. He is much more than an icon portrayed by so many in the Republican Party and the talk show network. He was a man of deeply held principles and yes, he was even a darn good politician. These two attributes are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are critical and it is paramount that the modern Republican Party recognize this fact if it want to effectively govern and lead the nation.
A member of Congress who merely has convictions or principles is little more than a clanging gong. All the right convictions coupled with the inability to sway others is useless in the political process. The congressperson might be good for exciting sound bites or TV punditry but they are ill suited for political effectiveness. Now don’t get me wrong. Convictions are the bedrock of any good politician. Reagan had them and everyone who came into contact with him knew he had them.
Reagan had several core principles that shaped his political philosophy. These convictions were: belief in the individual rather than groups, a smaller and less intrusive federal government and an undeniable sense of optimism about America’s exceptionalism and its future. In addition he was a big tent Republican. He sought to include as many people as possible into his political world view. He evidenced this by his famous statement that ‘if somebody agrees with me 80% of the time, that doesn't make him my enemy.” Reagan would work with the modern day Republican In Name Only (RINO’s) and blue dog democrats. These are (or should be) the core principles that drive the Republican Party today.
However, convictions are not enough. Just like a monk isolated on a mountain top monastery, the best ideals without the ability to influence those around you are a waste. Saint Reagan was an effective politician not only because of his convictions but due to the fact he did not stay on the mountain top. He entered the fray of politics in California and Washington. He was the most effective Republican president in generations, if not all time. He was not held hostage by his convictions, rather he used them to drive the political process. He consistently moved the nation closer his core beliefs one step at a time. Sometimes he even took a step back to take two steps forward. That is the essence of politics.
Remember, Reagan is not a simple icon or a medallion to hang around your neck. He was the consummate politician. He was so successful that Bill Clinton, the patron saint of the modern Democratic Party was forced to declare “the era of big government is over”. Reagan won, clear and simple. He had won the hearts and minds of the American people.
He did it by sticking to his convictions AND compromising along the way. Today’s Republicans and many in the Tea Party have much to learn from this. The nation is split. The fact that the Republicans think the other half of the country is flat-out wrong does not matter. The genius of our government is it follows the collective will of the people not those with the most passion or loudest voices. As long as the nation is split the Republicans will be unable to significantly achieve their goals. This does not mean that they quit trying; it just means they will have to get big and small victories whenever and where ever they can.
The Republicans need to win the majority of the hearts and minds of the American people. They do this by adopting and implementing the principles and political philosophy of the real, not sanctified, Ronald Reagan.
LaGrange Daily News 7.21.11
Friday, April 01, 2011
Lead or Get Out of the Way to Solve Debt Crisis
That ticking sound you hear is the national debt bomb. Just last week, Dallas Federal Reserve Bank President Richard Fisher stated that the United States is on a path to fiscal insolvency. He went on to say, “If we continue down the path on which the fiscal authorities are putting us, we will become insolvent; the question is when.” This is a chilling statement coming from the Federal Reserve.
With a national debt approaching $15 trillion and increasing $4 billion a day since 2007, there can be no doubt we are reaching a tipping point. Time is running out on our ability to stop the collapse of our financial solvency. We must take action now to address this unsustainable and growing debt.
On one level, every American knows we have a debt problem. While no one can comprehend a trillion dollars, you do not have to be an economist to know that we cannot continue to borrow one out of every three dollars we spend. Everyone knows this is unsustainable. However, the level of understanding of this problem is disturbing to say the least.
Recent polls demonstrate the American public’s general ignorance of our fiscal realities. A 2010 World Public Opinion survey found that Americans want to tackle deficits by cutting foreign aid from what they believe is the current level (27 percent of the budget) to a more prudent 13 percent. The real number is under 1 percent, much of which is military assistance to allies.
A Jan. 25 CNN poll revealed that even though 71 percent of voters want smaller government, vast majorities oppose cuts to Medicare (81 percent), Social Security (78 percent) and Medicaid (70 percent). Instead, they prefer to slash “waste,” the holy grail of politicians and of an uninformed electorate who believe said waste makes up 50 percent of spending, according to a 2009 Gallup poll. That is pure fantasy or wishful thinking.
Meaningful deficit reduction will take serious cuts to the entire federal budget. The problem is so severe that no portion of the budget can be off-limits. The American people need to face this reality. The issue is how do you educate 150 million taxpayers?
There are numerous advocacy groups trying desperately to educate the public as well as propose genuine solutions. One such group is Comeback America and is led by David Walker, the past comptroller of the United States. Check it out at www.tcaii.org. Mr. Walker has been preaching bipartisan fiscal responsibility for close to a decade. He states that the current fiscal debate is the equivalent of “arguing over the bar tab on the Titanic.” Walker predicts the United States will have a debt crisis “within the next two to three years” and implores Washington lawmakers to “wake up.” I believe he needs the voice of the president of the United States.
President Obama has been virtually silent on this issue. No, change that. He has not been silent; he routinely talks (and talks and talks) about the issue. The problem is that he is not doing anything to meaningfully affect the issue. Only the president can lead and educate the American people on this matter. Congress is a voice of 535 people. The president is the singular voice in the American political system to command the public’s attention.
President Obama knows this is a problem. He appointed the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (also called Bowles-Simpson Commission). This bipartisan group recommended meaningful reform to deaf ears. President Obama has decided it is too toxic and he will not lead on this issue. It would appear that heading into the 2012 election, he made the politically expeditious choice to let Congress, especially the Republicans, flail themselves on this issue. When they overreach due to the public’s ignorance of the issue, the president will seek a political advantage. This is not leadership – it is pure politics. Given the approaching fiscal Armageddon, this is political narcissism.
The president must address this issue. This is his chance to demonstrate true leadership and the bipartisanship he talks about all the time. The path forward is hard, but it can be done. If I could bend the president’s ear, this is what I would propose:
Build on the Bowles-Simpson Report. Set bold and meaning targets.
Educate the American people. Take every opportunity to deepen the public’s awareness of the magnitude of the problem.
Take the lead on reforming Social Security and Medicare. Only a Democrat can reform these key programs. It is political suicide for a Republican to touch them.
Join with key Republican hawks and the Tea Party to push for fiscal reform in the military. For a Democrat, proposing military cuts is political hari-kari. Only the Republicans can do this.
Set meaningful spending reductions for the discretionary budget and let Congress duke it out.
Follow all of this with more education. The key to this process is to ready the American people for meaningful change. They must support Congress and you in this very difficult effort.
This is the president’s opportunity to lead. Given the magnitude and urgency of the problem, it is time for the president to lead or get out the way. Our financial time bomb is ticking away.
Kirk Hancock is a member of LaGrange Writers Group.
Read more: La Grange News - Lead or get out of the way to solve debt crisis
With a national debt approaching $15 trillion and increasing $4 billion a day since 2007, there can be no doubt we are reaching a tipping point. Time is running out on our ability to stop the collapse of our financial solvency. We must take action now to address this unsustainable and growing debt.
On one level, every American knows we have a debt problem. While no one can comprehend a trillion dollars, you do not have to be an economist to know that we cannot continue to borrow one out of every three dollars we spend. Everyone knows this is unsustainable. However, the level of understanding of this problem is disturbing to say the least.
Recent polls demonstrate the American public’s general ignorance of our fiscal realities. A 2010 World Public Opinion survey found that Americans want to tackle deficits by cutting foreign aid from what they believe is the current level (27 percent of the budget) to a more prudent 13 percent. The real number is under 1 percent, much of which is military assistance to allies.
A Jan. 25 CNN poll revealed that even though 71 percent of voters want smaller government, vast majorities oppose cuts to Medicare (81 percent), Social Security (78 percent) and Medicaid (70 percent). Instead, they prefer to slash “waste,” the holy grail of politicians and of an uninformed electorate who believe said waste makes up 50 percent of spending, according to a 2009 Gallup poll. That is pure fantasy or wishful thinking.
Meaningful deficit reduction will take serious cuts to the entire federal budget. The problem is so severe that no portion of the budget can be off-limits. The American people need to face this reality. The issue is how do you educate 150 million taxpayers?
There are numerous advocacy groups trying desperately to educate the public as well as propose genuine solutions. One such group is Comeback America and is led by David Walker, the past comptroller of the United States. Check it out at www.tcaii.org. Mr. Walker has been preaching bipartisan fiscal responsibility for close to a decade. He states that the current fiscal debate is the equivalent of “arguing over the bar tab on the Titanic.” Walker predicts the United States will have a debt crisis “within the next two to three years” and implores Washington lawmakers to “wake up.” I believe he needs the voice of the president of the United States.
President Obama has been virtually silent on this issue. No, change that. He has not been silent; he routinely talks (and talks and talks) about the issue. The problem is that he is not doing anything to meaningfully affect the issue. Only the president can lead and educate the American people on this matter. Congress is a voice of 535 people. The president is the singular voice in the American political system to command the public’s attention.
President Obama knows this is a problem. He appointed the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (also called Bowles-Simpson Commission). This bipartisan group recommended meaningful reform to deaf ears. President Obama has decided it is too toxic and he will not lead on this issue. It would appear that heading into the 2012 election, he made the politically expeditious choice to let Congress, especially the Republicans, flail themselves on this issue. When they overreach due to the public’s ignorance of the issue, the president will seek a political advantage. This is not leadership – it is pure politics. Given the approaching fiscal Armageddon, this is political narcissism.
The president must address this issue. This is his chance to demonstrate true leadership and the bipartisanship he talks about all the time. The path forward is hard, but it can be done. If I could bend the president’s ear, this is what I would propose:
Build on the Bowles-Simpson Report. Set bold and meaning targets.
Educate the American people. Take every opportunity to deepen the public’s awareness of the magnitude of the problem.
Take the lead on reforming Social Security and Medicare. Only a Democrat can reform these key programs. It is political suicide for a Republican to touch them.
Join with key Republican hawks and the Tea Party to push for fiscal reform in the military. For a Democrat, proposing military cuts is political hari-kari. Only the Republicans can do this.
Set meaningful spending reductions for the discretionary budget and let Congress duke it out.
Follow all of this with more education. The key to this process is to ready the American people for meaningful change. They must support Congress and you in this very difficult effort.
This is the president’s opportunity to lead. Given the magnitude and urgency of the problem, it is time for the president to lead or get out the way. Our financial time bomb is ticking away.
Kirk Hancock is a member of LaGrange Writers Group.
Read more: La Grange News - Lead or get out of the way to solve debt crisis
Friday, February 04, 2011
Our Sputnick Moment?
There is nothing quite like a State of the Union address. The power and majesty of the President entering the House of Representative to a raucous ovation, from both parties is inspirational and unique to America. The entire government is represented in the audience. All are there to hear the President’s governing outline for the year. It the bully pulpit of the president at it best. It provides the President the singular event to set the nation’s agenda, to educate and to persuade the Congress and the American people to support his agenda.
There is no doubt we are in turbulent times. The President is faced with a weak economy, a nuclear Iran, a fractious Congress and most importantly a national debt that is spiraling out of control. The president chose to use a historical reference called the Sputnik moment to position his argument on how America will move forward. I think this reference failed and in turn the president missed a critical opportunity to prepare the American people for our greatest challenge in decades.
If you were around in the 1950’s or a history buff you might understand the reference to the Sputnik moment. Here is a little background. During the 1950’s all of America was transfixed on the growing cold war between the United States and the Soviet Empire. The majority of Americans saw this conflict as a battle between good and evil. The population knew that the Soviet Union was a very real threat to the American way of life. The battle lines were clear. They needed no explaining.
In 1957, the Soviets launched a basketball sized satellite into orbit. When this was announced to the world, America was dumbstruck. The Russians were beating the US into space. The Russians were winning therefore the Americans were losing. The consequences would be dire. Our very existence was called into question.
Why the panic? What could this little space age basketball do to the US? Absolutely nothing. This satellite had nothing to do with the Sputnik moment. The satellite was irrelevant. The fact it was launched into space was everything. Every American knew that if the Soviets could launch a satellite they could launch a ballistic missile capable of hitting the United States. President Eisenhower seized on this and called for investments in what later became NASA and other military and technological initiatives.
A Sputnik moment became a metaphor for the realization, triggered perhaps by a threat or challenge, of a need to do something different, setting a course in a new direction.
So why am I critical of President Obama’s call that we are facing another Sputnik moment? What is the threat we are facing? I don’t know. He did not tell us. He laid out a lot of platitudes about winning the future but he did not identify the very event that should galvanize all Americans to action.
Our Sputnik moment is the out of control national debt. It is the equivalent of a financial armageddon that is just as dangerous as a nuclear armageddon in the 1950’s. Our country’s very way of life is at stake if we do not gain control of our budget and debt.
It really is not that complicated. Our debt now exceeds $14 trillion dollars and is projected to increase by over one trillion a year for the foreseeable future. This means that our debt load will soon be greater than the entire economy. You do not have to be an economist to know that is not sustainable. We are not guaranteed a future. There is no god given right that the United States will exist in perpetuity.
The President glossed over the threat and jumped to his solution. More spending and a 5 year freeze on the discretionary portion of the budget. This freeze constitutes a $400 billion savings over ten years compared to a projected increase in the budget of ten plus trillion over the same period. He misled the public in that his spending freeze would solve the deficit problem.
He failed to deliver on the Sputnik moment in two ways. He did not define the event and his solution of spending more was not a new direction. It was more of the same.
Despite all of this I hold out a hope that President Obama is uniquely positioned to solve the spending and debt problem. I am a contrarian when it comes to major political break throughs. I think some of our greatest success comes from the most unlikely president. Here are few examples:
• It took a ardent anti-communist, Richard Nixon, to be the first American president to visit China
• It took a southerner, Lyndon Johnson, to get civil rights passed
• It took a Democrat, Bill Clinton, to overhaul welfare
I think the budget deficit can only be solved by a Democrat. If a Republican proposes deep cuts, he or she will be assailed as hating the poor. If President Obama can seize the initiative, his solid liberal background will provide the cover needed to make the necessary cuts to the welfare state.
However, cuts to the welfare state will not be enough. We must make cuts in the warfare state as well. For that he will need a Republican to propose the cuts. Just in the case of a Republican cutting welfare it is political suicide for a Democrat to cut defense. It will take cuts to both parties to bring our budget under control.
I think there are two questions. Does president Obama really understand the magnitude of the deficit and does he have the will power to address it? If so, he will have to use his political capital to ensure welfare cuts while partnering with a true patriot on the Republican side that will help address excess spending on the defense side of the ledger. This is the kind of bipartisanship we need.
There is no doubt we are in turbulent times. The President is faced with a weak economy, a nuclear Iran, a fractious Congress and most importantly a national debt that is spiraling out of control. The president chose to use a historical reference called the Sputnik moment to position his argument on how America will move forward. I think this reference failed and in turn the president missed a critical opportunity to prepare the American people for our greatest challenge in decades.
If you were around in the 1950’s or a history buff you might understand the reference to the Sputnik moment. Here is a little background. During the 1950’s all of America was transfixed on the growing cold war between the United States and the Soviet Empire. The majority of Americans saw this conflict as a battle between good and evil. The population knew that the Soviet Union was a very real threat to the American way of life. The battle lines were clear. They needed no explaining.
In 1957, the Soviets launched a basketball sized satellite into orbit. When this was announced to the world, America was dumbstruck. The Russians were beating the US into space. The Russians were winning therefore the Americans were losing. The consequences would be dire. Our very existence was called into question.
Why the panic? What could this little space age basketball do to the US? Absolutely nothing. This satellite had nothing to do with the Sputnik moment. The satellite was irrelevant. The fact it was launched into space was everything. Every American knew that if the Soviets could launch a satellite they could launch a ballistic missile capable of hitting the United States. President Eisenhower seized on this and called for investments in what later became NASA and other military and technological initiatives.
A Sputnik moment became a metaphor for the realization, triggered perhaps by a threat or challenge, of a need to do something different, setting a course in a new direction.
So why am I critical of President Obama’s call that we are facing another Sputnik moment? What is the threat we are facing? I don’t know. He did not tell us. He laid out a lot of platitudes about winning the future but he did not identify the very event that should galvanize all Americans to action.
Our Sputnik moment is the out of control national debt. It is the equivalent of a financial armageddon that is just as dangerous as a nuclear armageddon in the 1950’s. Our country’s very way of life is at stake if we do not gain control of our budget and debt.
It really is not that complicated. Our debt now exceeds $14 trillion dollars and is projected to increase by over one trillion a year for the foreseeable future. This means that our debt load will soon be greater than the entire economy. You do not have to be an economist to know that is not sustainable. We are not guaranteed a future. There is no god given right that the United States will exist in perpetuity.
The President glossed over the threat and jumped to his solution. More spending and a 5 year freeze on the discretionary portion of the budget. This freeze constitutes a $400 billion savings over ten years compared to a projected increase in the budget of ten plus trillion over the same period. He misled the public in that his spending freeze would solve the deficit problem.
He failed to deliver on the Sputnik moment in two ways. He did not define the event and his solution of spending more was not a new direction. It was more of the same.
Despite all of this I hold out a hope that President Obama is uniquely positioned to solve the spending and debt problem. I am a contrarian when it comes to major political break throughs. I think some of our greatest success comes from the most unlikely president. Here are few examples:
• It took a ardent anti-communist, Richard Nixon, to be the first American president to visit China
• It took a southerner, Lyndon Johnson, to get civil rights passed
• It took a Democrat, Bill Clinton, to overhaul welfare
I think the budget deficit can only be solved by a Democrat. If a Republican proposes deep cuts, he or she will be assailed as hating the poor. If President Obama can seize the initiative, his solid liberal background will provide the cover needed to make the necessary cuts to the welfare state.
However, cuts to the welfare state will not be enough. We must make cuts in the warfare state as well. For that he will need a Republican to propose the cuts. Just in the case of a Republican cutting welfare it is political suicide for a Democrat to cut defense. It will take cuts to both parties to bring our budget under control.
I think there are two questions. Does president Obama really understand the magnitude of the deficit and does he have the will power to address it? If so, he will have to use his political capital to ensure welfare cuts while partnering with a true patriot on the Republican side that will help address excess spending on the defense side of the ledger. This is the kind of bipartisanship we need.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)