For me and my fellow Americans, something truly magical happens once every fourth year. We get to watch a field of rich old white men vie to become the (semi)elected leader of the United States.
(Well, also February gets an extra day, so I guess two magical things happen every fourth year.)
This year is no different. OK, it's a little different, because there are a couple of non-ROWMs in the presidential race --- and not just in it, but seriously contending with a real shot at election.
Between the slanderous election ads, the millions of dollars in political-favor-IOUs accrued by each candidate, and the constant reminders that the winner will probably accomplish nothing in the long run, the yearlong campaign season is perhaps one of the most special times in an American's life.
It's like Christmas for a solid 12 months, maybe longer --- so exciting, in fact, that it almost makes me want to join in.
Here (after a painfully drawn-out introduction) I find myself thinking what I would do if I were president:
First, I'd send a $600 rebate check to every working, tax-paying American.
Wait. No. I'm thinking of somebody else.
OK, first, I'd get really serious about the environment. In many ways (mostly morbid ones) I think it should be our top priority. What I mean is: in the worst-case scenarios, if disease, poverty, lack of health care or terrorist attacks go unchecked and ravage our society, the outcomes would almost certainly be such that mankind could recover from them with time. In the case of the environment, if we totally destroy our air and water to the point that we can't breathe and drink them (respectively) then there's a pretty solid chance human life would end. Maybe its unreasonable of me to plan for the worst-case scenario, but nonetheless the argument makes the point that environmental issues are far more serious than I've seen any politician give them credit for (except maybe Al Gore, but I still suspect he's trying to sell something; plus he no longer holds a political office). Despite the efforts of activist groups, trees and fresh water still don't carry the kind of political clout as, oh say, electric power utilities and oil companies.
My particular solutions would need further research. But initially I'm thinking a somewhat more serious push for conservation and lifestyle changes, not just bandages such as 5 percent more ethanol in our gas. I think we'd be looking at heavy usage taxes on automobiles and/or gasoline and more funding for improved public transit systems. As much as I'd like to, in principle, be a small government, libertarian-type leader, I'm afraid in reality people just aren't going to make the necessary changes until they're given some strong incentive. Alternative fuels for our three cars per household are not enough. People need a reason to drive less. Otherwise, not only will we keep burning absurd amounts of gasoline, but we'll also keep building absurd amounts of new highways to battle the congestion.
How's that for a campaign speech? What red-blooded American could hear a campaign promise like that and not rush right out and write a fat campaign-donation check?
OK, what else? $600 rebate checks? Anyone? No? All right, then.
I suppose we've got to do something about health care, and I'd be lying if I claimed to know what it is. I know this much: the federal government is perhaps the least efficient organization on the planet, and I don't really want to give it anything else to run. In other words, a universal, government-run health care program sounds like a bad idea to me.
I do tend to agree that our current system is broken, but I don't think making it more complicated and bureaucratic is the answer. I like trends toward transparency in pricing, for example. As it is now, there's no motivation for health care providers to compete on price, because no one knows what the prices are. The prices are different for each patient, too, depending on what the insurance companies have negotiated.
Wow. This presidenting is hard.
As for the war against terror, I'd probably just send Osama a nice handwritten letter on some pretty stationery and ask him to start playing nice. I think he would see my point.
I'm well aware that I don't have all the answers, nor would I be able to figure them all out even if I spent a full year doing nothing but researching and planning for a campaign (which is exactly how I currently have 2011 blocked off). In this awareness, however, I would do my best to surround myself with brilliant thinkers. I suspect my cabinet would look more like an academic council than a political body.
Or maybe I'd just build a massive water slide on the White House lawn with taxpayer dollars. We'll see. I'm open to suggestions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
Excellent post, and I'm with you on all counts. Especially that water slide thing, although you'd have to build a ramp for it because the lawn is pretty flat. Or you could just put in a Slip 'n' Slide.
On one hand, I think you'd make a great president. However, I must make three very important points:
1. I would have to share you with the entire US of A.
2. As First Lady, I would have to come up with something to work on, and I would choose the qualifying to be parents/mass sterilization platform.
3. We both know you are too indecisive for the job... but then again, you'd have your cabinet!
Aren't I actually giving myself $600. More accurately, aren't you (as someone who I assume makes enough money to really pay taxes) actually chipping in most of that $600. Thanks Chris! I'm still gonna buy me a hammock.
I'd vote for you, except you're probably not vicious enough to be effective. And I say good for you.
I concede that Meaghan is all too correct: I am way too indecisive to ever be an effective president.
I'd be all getting the plans drawn up for the tall water slide, and then I'd change my mind, decide it'd be tacky and put out a Slip 'n' Slide instead. Then we would have spent money on the plans for a water slide that would never be built.
It'd be ugly. They'd call it Water Slide Gate.
While I don't doubt the inefficiency and unneeded bureaucracy of the federal government, I also think that most people overestimate the efficiency of the typical big business. I think anyone who's tried to deal with any cable, phone, other similar company can attest to that.
I don't care if you're indecisive as long as you keep the promise to surround yourself with briliant cabinet members.
I challenge you to continue this a bit by answering this question: Who would be your cabinet members? (I know you said intellectuals, but who?) NEW POST! NEW POST!
please visit Bacon Soup for a critique of your post.
Meaghan, that sounds a little research intensive --- unless you're looking for bogus, comedic answers in which case I might be able to oblige.
I would vote for you. I liked your stance on environmental issues. Of course I'm not American so my vote wouldn't count.
Chris- of course we're looking for comedic answers. Just what the hell do you think the purpose of a blog is?
More specifically, I think we want you to appoint us a members of your bogus cabinet. How do you not get this?
Yeah, Mickey is right on. We want it comedic and we want to be included (only I don't think I'd qualify for the cabinet and I won't be offended if you don't include me).
Appoint me Secretary of Agriculture and Coolness!
Post a Comment