Running Versus Governing

While I'm glad to see Democratic majorities in Congress and a Democrat coming to the White House, I remain concerned about the long-term--heck, even the short-term--policies for the nation. Because I see races being won on policies that are neither wise nor sustainable, and I think our newly elected officials know better.

Yes, politicians run on what they need to to get elected. But running is different than governing, and if the governing goes badly, it makes it a lot harder to get reelected.

We know that our nation's fiscal policy cannot survive endless tax cuts. Yet both Democrats and Republicans ran on tax cuts for just about everyone. Obama, whose tax plan which raises rates on the highest-income Americans, proudly stated that his proposal was still a net tax cut for the nation (probably so that he wouldn't get labeled as a tax-and-spender). Yet if revenues decrease and expenditures continue to rise at present rates, we know we will dig ourselves into dependency and penury.

Many Democrats and Republicans both ran on lower gas prices. But we all know, or should know, that low gas prices are inconsistent with our calls for energy independence. Now that gas is back down, there are indications that bad habits are returning: people are driving more, and the incentive to buy more efficient cars is lessened. And it should be obvious that when gas is cheap, alternative fuel sources can't compete, delaying our inevitable and ultimately beneficial transition off of foreign oil. For economic, environmental, and national security reasons, the sooner we make the transition the better. Yet our politicians seem trapped by the demand for lower gas prices now and for the foreseeable future.

And after years of talking about Social Security, there is still no serious proposal on the table for dealing with its long-term future. We know that with our aging population, the demographics of the situation will lead to huge costs if nothing is done. But since there is no immediate problem, no crisis, the public ignores it and our politicians don't bring it up since it can only lose votes.

So how can we start to address these important issues when there seems to be no sense of urgency? I think it goes something like this.

Our elected officials need to say that we have some hard choices ahead. But they can't make the hard choices unless enough of their constituents are willing to make those same hard choices. Because that is where the ultimate accountability lies in our system of government: not with 535 representatives on Capitol Hill and the resident of the White House, but with the 200+ million eligible voters of this nation. We can't expect our officials to make difficult decisions about our future unless we are willing to do the same.

So then we can be asked: do we really want low gas prices? Because we can have it--but then we should be told not to expect to achieve energy independence. Do we really want to preserve Social Security? We can do it, but not without some kind of action on our part. Do we really want tax cut after tax cut? We can have it, but not without destroying our society's future.

We can, with the help of our elected leaders, look at our problems and see that the solutions lie within our grasp, but only if we choose to act. We can take responsibility for our fiscal situation and realize that "the government" doesn't tax us; we tax ourselves for the programs we say we want. Then we can have that messy, sprawling discussion that resolves itself however imperfectly through our representative system. We can ask ourselves how badly we want energy independence and consider whether we'd tolerate a gradually increasing gas tax to create incentives for ourselves to change our behavior. We can think about whether caring for the retired is worth asking those of us in our 30s, 40s, and perhaps early 50s to wait a little longer before receiving Social Security benefits when we retire.

Our leadership should not tell us what to think, but what to think about. And then we can choose. Right now, I fear we're not even thinking. We're not thinking because most people don't have the interest, time, or energy, and our leaders see little to gain by bringing these things up. But we could all be so much better off if some group of legislators on the Hill got together and decided to ask us as a nation: are we serious about these problems? And if we are serious, what are we willing to do?

The public has expressed a great deal of dissatisfaction with the direction of the country. Someone should tell us that the direction is our responsibility. If we want different results, we have to start making different choices. And some of those choices will be tough ones. It would help if our leaders would start letting us off the hook for the choices we have made, and asked us what choices we are willing to make to change our direction. Because pulling a lever for a candidate of a different party won't give those who get elected any more support for hard choices if we continue to avoid those choices ourselves.