I had the opportunity to watch the presidential debate last
night in the peace and quiet of my basement without the kids running
around. The debate was supposed to be
broken down into 6 segments, with 3 segments on the economy (job creation, taxes,
and balanced budget), 1 on health care, and 1 on the role of government along
with opening and closing remarks.
I have been leaning towards Obama from the outset. My original enthusiasm was liberal social values
and an educated person as president.
Those have not changed, but what really swayed me toward Romney in the
debate last night was the role of government and governance.
In terms of this ideology, I thought Romney was well
prepared and resonated with my own opinion of government. Obama started out with safety and then delved
into education and government spending citing the transcontinental railroad and
the National Academy of Sciences. Romney
also resonated with defense spending but spent more time on liberties and the
pursuit of happiness (choice). I think
the most relevant government programs that were not addressed are the National
Institute of Health and DARPA.
Going back to the opening topics, I struggle with Obama’s
message on the economy. By providing
incentives for green energy versus traditional energy, we are indeed picking
winners and losers. That does not help
anyone. Clear specific regulations help
everybody. Some programs are up to
government, such as pipelines which will put people to work and provide
valuable infrastructure. I struggle
with Romney creating 12 million new jobs through small business. If history is any guide, 6 million of those
jobs will be lost by 2020.
Given the Republican tax pledge, Obama’s plans to reduce
spending will not get through. I think
Romney’s plan will hurt the middle class.
The 5 most common deductions (loopholes is not the correct word) are
home mortgage interest, charitable donations, income taxes paid, real estate
taxes paid and medical and dental expenses.
I see at least a couple of these going away or being capped. However a cap on charitable deductions may
hurt the 1% more than anybody else given the scam of buying a piece of art,
having it appraised at a ridiculous value and then donating it to charity. I agree with a lower tax rate and fewer
deductions.
On education, I also resonate with Romney more than
Obama. Obama’s plan to hire more
teachers will not do anything if those teachers are under qualified or hampered
by an oppressive teacher’s union. Obama’s
best remark was having private companies work with community colleges to
provide specific job training. Romney’s
point of having lower income kids go to the school of their choice resonated
with me as well. Rather than fund
bloated public institutions that may or may not be successful, kids should be
able to choose to go to local schools, charter schools, private schools or
on-line schools.
I do believe a country’s future depends on education. America is home to some of the best schools
in the world, but access is rightfully restricted to the best and
brightest. If the costs of these schools are not affordable, that problem should be solved with supply and demand, not by
lower the cost of borrowing. That did
not work with housing and will not work with education.
The healthcare topic is much trickier. I am not well versed on the Affordable Health
Care Act, but I do believe that forcing Americans to buy health care is not
constitutional. I also believe there is
a poor safety net for the uninsured.
Neither Obama nor Romney made a significant point in terms of health
care. Romney kept harping on a 15 person
non-elected board making health care choices.
Obama did not say anything, insisting that costs would come down once
the Affordable Health Care Act was fully implemented.
Overall I was very impressed by the preparation of
Romney. The most compelling facts were
undisputed: 23 million people out of
work, 1 out of 6 in poverty, and 47 million on food stamps versus 32 million on
food stamps. 50% of college graduates
this year not being able to find work was disputed, but not by much. The “trickle-down government” title was
particularly interesting as it flew in the face of Reagan’s trickle-down
economic theories as well as Obama’s.
One interesting number was highly disputed. Obama kept referring to Romney's $5 trillion in tax cuts, which he repeatedly denied. He stated no tax cuts which would increase the deficit. The tax cuts will only be revenue neutral by eliminating deductions for everybody.
I am no longer willing to vote based on my beliefs on
abortion rights, gun rights, or gay rights.
I am anxiously waiting to listen to the vice presidential debate along
with the next two presidential debates in order to determine my vote for
president.
No comments:
Post a Comment