One and Done

It’s a new year, with new ideals and certainly new issues to vote on in the election taking place this November. For many people, voting for a politician is always difficult to do because there are so many policies and policy standpoints to look for in a candidate. For others, a preference regarding a lone issue is all it takes for their ballots to be filled. These voters are known as single issue voters.

Single issue voters are very common and usually base the winner of their votes on the candidate’s take about a controversial subject. A heavily debated topic such as abortion, the right to gay marriage or amnesty for illegal immigrants is often what is at the forefront of a single issue voter’s mind.

In Single-Issue Politics, author and voting trends expert Robert Spaeth reports his studies of single issue voting, particularly in the age group of 18 to 22. From his results, he notices that, “Many people believe that when an issue is a moral issue, it overrides all political concerns” and many of these people tend to become so focused on that single issue, that they ignore all others. He further explains that in a sense, this narrow focus makes it so that voters are vulnerable because they blindly vote for politicians based only on this issue and thus are impacted by other beliefs of the politician that they may have disagreed with.

Clearly, though it is important to consider what political standpoint on a particular matter is most important to you when voting, it is also important to consider that there are a wide range of issues which make up a candidate, so in the end, voting for a politician based on just one of aspect or ideal may mean unknowingly compromising on other topics that may be just as important.

Dr. Duwel, who teaches both Civics and AP Government at Pres, also mentions that compromise is a disadvantage when it comes to single-issue voting, though in a different sense. She states, “Single issue voters are usually very passionate and intense when it comes to the issue that they care about. This intensity can lead them to demand that the politicians who represent them refuse to make compromises during the policy making process. But in order for a democracy to function properly, citizens and their leaders must be willing to make compromises because not everyone can have exactly what they want all of the time.”

Dr. Duwel, however, admits that when she was a new voter, she would base her choice politician on a single issue. Now, she tries to look at the bigger picture and choose someone who is intellectually capable, has integrity, is open-minded, and is able to make good decisions on important topics, even if those decisions would be contrary to her own.

Many of you readers, if enrolled in either the Civics or AP Government course with Dr. Duwel, took a survey in your class. The results are acting as a sample to represent how Pres girls feel about single issue voting. In total, 93 students participated in the survey.

When students were asked if they would vote for a politician solely because they had the same views on a given topic, 72 percent of students said that they would not, while 28 percent of students said that they would. Then, when asked if it was a deal breaker if there was a politician they really supported and agreed with, but the candidate’s standpoint on a given issue was contrary from their own, 46 percent of students said it would definitely be, while 54 percent of students said that they would still consider the candidate. Many students who said that they would vote for a politician on a lone issue, though, did say that a candidate with an opposing standpoint would not necessarily lose their vote. And others who responded that they would not vote based on a single issue said that an opposing standpoint would cause a politician to lose their vote. (The poll also conveyed the moral issues that are at the forefront of Pres girls’ concerns – displayed on graph).

In general, though, the results say that Pres girls are open minded and willing to compromise on issues, which is an advantage when voting because being open to other beliefs broadens the range of candidates that you would be willing to vote for, and more choices is certainly always to your benefit.

When you vote later this year or in future elections, keep in mind all of the issues at hand. You may find that you will need to compromise on certain issues in order to get what you want for others, but at least you will be fully informed and able to pick the best candidate for the job, which is, of course, what democracy is all about.

Cray Cray Politicians: Rick Perry

As the 2012 presidential election draws closer, candidates are making themselves, and their policies known to the American people. For the past two months, Rick Perry’s name and face have been on the front of newspapers, magazines, TV talk shows and Internet homepages. But who exactly is Rick Perry?

The current governor of Texas, Perry, announced his run for the White House on August 13. A few weeks ago he was considered the front runner but recent rolls have shown that he has moved into second behind Mitt Romney. However, who is Rick Perry besides another person who thinks he can make President Obama a one-term President?

Some people see Perry as a governor who helped Texas’ economy thrive and created jobs for thousands of Texans who otherwise would have been unable to pay the little taxes required of them. Others, such as those with a sufficient amount of cynicism and intelligence, view him as a man who is controlled by money and gives jobs to the rich and the rich alone.

Rick Perry claims to have created thousands of jobs and helped his state thrive in his three terms as governor, but when almost one in five Texans are living below the poverty line, is his claim really true? Fine, Rick Perry created jobs for some, but there are many other people who are still struggling.

Perry is a firm believer in little government involvement in the lives of the people and this has greatly impacted the poor in Texas who are unable to receive financial and medical support. If elected, Perry will leave the poor of America to fend for themselves, just like he has done in Texas. Do we really want this man running our country?
As a DEVOUT Christian, Perry has not kept his religion private. In August, Governor Perry hosted an event known as “The Response.” This daylong prayer and fasting service was meant, according to Perry, to ask for “God’s forgiveness, his wisdom, and his provision for our state and nation.”

I am not a history major, but isn’t America built on the foundation of a separation of church and state? Therefore, I am a little worried that a governor of a state, let alone a presidential candidate, is hosting an event in which people are praying for our nation and asking for God’s help.

Rick Perry claims to have succeeded in helping Texas thrive. However, Texas is only one state. The President has to run 50 of them and focus on international relations and foreign policy.

Former undersecretary of the Navy during President Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush’s terms Seth Cropsey said, “I don’t know where he stands and I don’t know whether he knows where he stands,” in regards to foreign policy. Perry has been a state politician for over 26 years yet has no idea how to handle the events and situations outside our borders.

Perry ALSO has some very interesting plans for our nation if he is elected. He would overturn the sixteenth and seventeenth amendments. Perry says, “The American people mistakenly empowered the federal government during a fit of populist rage in the early twentieth century by giving it an unlimited source of income (the Sixteenth Amendment) and by changing the way senators are elected (the Seventeenth Amendment).”

Yet how are roads supposed to be fixed and schools supposed to be funded without income tax? In addition, it seems to me that the direct election of senators is not a major issue facing our country currently, so why change it?

Not only would he change the Constitution by overturning amendments, he would also add an amendment that would ban gay marriage in all states. He would also make abortion illegal throughout America. This confuses me a little. Perry is pushing for less government control and wants the states to receive more power. Yet he also wants to take the issues of gay marriage and abortion away from the state. I think that’s a little hypocritical.
Perry should not be elected President of the United States of America. He should not hold the same position Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, and Franklin D. Roosevelt once held. He has no idea what he is doing and relies on his “success” as a governor to convince people that he has what it takes to run our nation.

If Rick Perry is elected, it is almost guaranteed that our nation will lose its position as a world power because how are we supposed to be a major power if our president has no idea of his position on foreign policy. How can we maintain separation of church and state if our president is holding prayer services? Instead of proposing changes that will improve America, Perry is asking us to turn to God, when not all Americans believe in the same God and some don’t believe in anything at all.

We need a president who is capable of improving our nation, not someone who ignores the poor and spends his time at debates insulting Mitt Romney rather than proposing new ideas and policies. But, I suppose that, when he has nothing to offer, his only option is to turn to bickering with the nearest opponent.

 

Politicians Look Like Fools with their Pants on the Ground

Women are beginning to take their place in the world. For the first time in the history of the United States, women will hold a majority in the number of college graduates and the population of the labor force. Women are also finding successful careers in politics. In California, two women, both former CEOs of major corporations, are currently running for political office: Carly Fiorina and Meg Whitman. Fiorina had a very successful career before announcing her campaign for the California Senate seat against Barbara Boxer. As CEO of HP, she was the first woman to lead the Fortune 500 list – a major accomplishment. Whitman, who is running for California governor, was given a similar honor when she was ranked the most powerful woman in business in 2004 and 2005 by Fortune for her work as CEO of EBay.

These women are people of integrity and determination. They have broken through the glass ceiling that has forbidden women from participating in business and politics. They are equal to men, except in one thing: they probably will not get themselves into the same sexual scandals that so many male politicians have found themselves in.

The reason that men cheat more than women is sometimes attributed to hormones. While men think of sex once every hour, women think of sex once every few days. Infidelity Statistics also found that 60% of men cheat on their spouse at least once in their marriage compared to 40% of women who do so. While the percentages for both are quite high, it must be noted that men are 20% more likely to cheat.

Sadly, the American people cannot look to their representatives and politicians as examples because it seems that they are just as likely to be involved in scandals as everyone else. The good thing: women politicians have proven capable of controlling themselves in positions of power. Men, on the other hand, are another story.

The most famous such political scandal was that of former president Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinski. Instead of being busy at his desk, Clinton was getting busy in the Oval Office. Unlike many politicians that get away easily with such scandals, Clinton was duly punished for his infidelity to his job and his wife. After denying his affair, Clinton was impeached on charges of lying under oath by the House of Representatives. Luckily for him, the Senate spared him impeachment and eternal ruin by one vote. But such is the life of a politician.

Another recent scandal involves John Edwards, former senator and presidential nominee. Edwards probably felt a lot of pressure when his wife was diagnosed with breast cancer. However, instead of being there to support his wife, Edwards sought out comfort in a different way: he found a mistress. Rielle Hunter was able to console Edwards for quite a long time, that is, until the media discovered that he was cheating on his cancer-stricken wife.

Recently, Elizabeth Edwards released a memoir called Resilience: Reflections on the Burdens and Gifts Facing Life’s Adversities, which details her emotions regarding the affair and other obstacles in her life. Until a little while ago, Elizabeth was part of the 70% of women who do not know about their husband’s infidelity. A very obstinate person, John Edwards attempted to deny the affair completely, convincing his chief of staff, Andrew Young, to disavow that Hunter was his mistress and that her child was his also. Now that his daughter is two years old, Edwards has finally announced that he is the father of Hunter’s child, as if the DNA hadn’t already shown it. In January 2010, Elizabeth finally legally divorced her unfaithful husband after meeting his love child.

And these two are just the tip of the iceberg. Last June, South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford confessed to an affair with a woman in Argentina, after being caught lying about his official travel itinerary. A year earlier, Eliot Spitzer was forced to resign as governor of New York after being caught patronizing prostitutes. More locally, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom admitted to cheating—with his so-called best friend’s wife, while San Jose Mayor Ron Gonzales had an affair with an intern. At least he later married her, but that’s probably little consolation to his former wife.

So are female politicians simply morally superior? Possibly. Debbie Walsh, director of the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University, suggests, “Women are more conscious and aware that they are being held to an even higher standard.” But James Taranto of The Wall Street Journal counters that women simply lack the opportunity to cheat. “[S]uccessful politicians, who usually are middle-aged or older, tend to have the qualities that make men superficially attractive to women (status and power), but lack those that make women superficially attractive to men (youth and beauty).”

While politicians are human, it is quite disconcerting that the leaders of our nation do not have enough integrity and fidelity to “keep it in their pants.” Not only that, but they insist on lying about the affair until something drastic happens – like the threat of impeachment.

Children are taught that a promise is a promise, and a lie is a lie – that’s the long and short of it; yet it seems that our politicians missed out on kindergarten because otherwise they would know that the more you cheat, break promises, and lie, the more trouble you get into. Let’s hope that Whitman and Fiorina can do a little better.