Earlier this week, the United States witnessed the second inauguration of President Barack Obama. The event was full of celebrities, progressive idealism, and well rehearsed speeches. And yes, it was the presidential inauguration, not the Academy Awards.
In all seriousness, I am surprised that we have not descended into a state of desolation and hopelessness. Wasn't inflation supposed to make our dollar worthless? Why did jobless claims drop to its lowest level in five years? I was under the belief that Obama was going to tear apart the Constitution and in the process destroy our economy.
Of course that did not happen and probably will not happen. The United States is the most resilient country in the world. We always have overcome adversity while preserving our constitutional rights. Moreover, President Obama has done a great job implementing policies that have helped our economic recovery.
Yet, the GOP still has a problem. A problem that some have analogized to alcoholism. Included in the 12-Step Program for GOP resurgence is the first two steps - admit that there is a problem and go outside of the GOP comfort zone. In other words, stop opposing Obama for the sake of opposing Obama and reach out to minorities.
Even with these two steps laid out, the party decided to take a different approach. On the day of the inauguration and on the anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I have a dream" speech, Virginia Republicans voted for a redistricting bill that will maximize GOP seats and reduce Democratic seats. The purpose of the bill is to ensure GOP-dominant districts.
There was also a bit of irony. The vote was was brought when a civil rights leader was absent from the Virginia senate to witness the President's inauguration in person. Henry Marsh, the first black mayor of Richmond and civil rights attorney, was unable to cast a no vote. The bill was passed with a one vote majority, all Republicans. So much for reaching out to minorities.
Gerrymandering is not a new political tactic. It has been a favorite of both parties and it does not serve the interest of the American people. When elected officials redraw congressional districts to favor their own political party, it creates more polarization and facilitates electoral injustice. Furthermore, it gives legislators no incentive to compromise because there is a less of a chance that the incumbent could lose his or her seat.
Swing states throughout the country are considering measures like Virginia. Pennsylvania wants to distribute presidential electoral votes based upon the outcome of each district in the state. Pennsylvania has 18 districts, with 6 of those being comprised of urban voters. If Pennsylvania were to adopt the proposal, Mitt Romney would have won Pennsylvania 12 to 6 despite having lost the popular vote by 5 percent.
So if you live in Philadelphia or Pittsburgh, you can count on the fact that your vote does not count. At least in relation to the voters in more rural districts.
The Presidential election would have been different if all of the republican-controlled swing state legislatures changed their electoral system to the one Pennsylvania is debating. Mitt Romney would have won the electoral college 280-258. President Romney would have been carrying his binders full of women to the White House.
This is not an absurd possibility. It is actually more probable than you would think. In the 2012 election, the American people voted 49 percent to 48.2 percent for Democratic representatives in the House. What was the outcome of the House of Representatives? The Republicans maintained a strong majority. This has only happened three times in one hundred years, wherein the party with more votes ended up in the minority position.
In North Carolina, Democrats received over half of the votes in the state yet the Republicans have 70% of the seats. Democracy at its best.
There is an adage, "If you can't beat them, cheat them." The GOP may have to change its motto to reflect its priorities. Again, there is a road map for the conservative party to re-image and re-brand. But, I can promise you that this is not the right step forward. You cannot simply gerrymander a Romney into the presidency.
Sunday, January 27, 2013
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Necesitamos una reforma migratoria ahora!
Me llamo Cristopher, and I believe in immigration reform. I also believe that I need to work on my Spanish so I can complete a whole introductory sentence en Espanol. Eso es chido. Okay, sorry... I will stop with the Spanglish.
The reality is that we are a county of immigrants and have always been a melting pot of different cultures, beliefs, and traditions. Diversity has been a good thing. For one, it has helped our economy. Mayor Villaraigosa correctly pointed out that 40% of the Fortune 500 companies were started by immigrants.
Second, it has led to innovation. The New York Times found that immigrants and foreign born students have helped increase the number of patents in the United States. Some of those patents have already saved lives. Ashlesh Murthy, from India, developed a vaccine. And Wenyuan Shi, from China, developed a lollipop ingredient that works as dental treatment for children. I should have checked that out before I got my wisdom teeth removed.
Third, and perhaps most importantly, it has led to a wide variety of restaurants in the greater Los Angeles area. I admit that this third benefit was intended to be funny but it speaks to the truth about the need for novelty. With so many different types of people living amongst one another, a person can find any type of exotic cuisine. It also means that a person can learn new things and make new friends.
Despite these proven benefits, immigration reform has been a polarized issue. Well...until President Barack Obama defeated Mitt Romney by 5 million total votes and 120 electoral votes. Included in the victorious Obama coalition were Hispanic voters, who either were immigrants themselves or family members of immigrants. The Hispanic vote went 75-23% for Obama, the widest margin in presidential politics.
One day after the election, on November 7 2012, Sean Hannity announced, on his conservative television program, that he would support comprehensive immigration reform. That was a dramatic change from when he supported self-deportation, a large border fence, and a rogue state immigration law like SB 1070 in Arizona.
He may have had an overnight revelation. But it is more likely that he read the exit polls during the night and could not go back to sleep.
It doesn't matter if the GOP changed its stance on immigration for the purposes of self-preservation. A political party should adapt to the conditions of the country. But more importantly, we now have the opportunity to pass a bipartisan immigration bill.
With this GOP cooperation, a path for citizenship can be laid out for millions of immigrants. And it does not have to be amnesty. President Obama wants to include penalties for those who have came here in violations of our current immigration laws. There could be a fine and a mandate to pay back taxes.
These criteria combined with strict border enforcement, employment verification, and a tough stance on felonious immigrants leads to comprehensive reform, which works for everyone.
Back in the 19th Century, an argument was made for equality in labor. Hinton Helper eloquently stated that, "the causes which have impeded the progress and prosperity of The South, which have dwindled our commerce, and other similar pursuits, into the most contemptible insignificance; sunk a large majority of our people in galling poverty and ignorance, entailed upon us a humiliating dependence on the Free States; may all be traced to one common source, Slavery."
In a way, undocumented labor has become similar to slavery. And like slavery, undocumented labor only hurts the economy. Undocumented workers depress wages, make products less safe, and encourage an atmosphere of shadow and noncompliance. Could you imagine what would happen if these individuals paid taxes and became citizens?
Economists already have. The United States GDP would increase $1.5 trillion over 10 years and federal revenues would increase $4.5 billion in the first three years. It sounds like the tea party should talk with Hannity if they are serious about deficit reduction.
Comprehensive immigration reform is good for everyone, economically and morally. This is not the time to fight about a fence or the possibility that the US will become a "magnet" for illegals. Necesitamos una reforma ahora!
The reality is that we are a county of immigrants and have always been a melting pot of different cultures, beliefs, and traditions. Diversity has been a good thing. For one, it has helped our economy. Mayor Villaraigosa correctly pointed out that 40% of the Fortune 500 companies were started by immigrants.
Second, it has led to innovation. The New York Times found that immigrants and foreign born students have helped increase the number of patents in the United States. Some of those patents have already saved lives. Ashlesh Murthy, from India, developed a vaccine. And Wenyuan Shi, from China, developed a lollipop ingredient that works as dental treatment for children. I should have checked that out before I got my wisdom teeth removed.
Third, and perhaps most importantly, it has led to a wide variety of restaurants in the greater Los Angeles area. I admit that this third benefit was intended to be funny but it speaks to the truth about the need for novelty. With so many different types of people living amongst one another, a person can find any type of exotic cuisine. It also means that a person can learn new things and make new friends.
Despite these proven benefits, immigration reform has been a polarized issue. Well...until President Barack Obama defeated Mitt Romney by 5 million total votes and 120 electoral votes. Included in the victorious Obama coalition were Hispanic voters, who either were immigrants themselves or family members of immigrants. The Hispanic vote went 75-23% for Obama, the widest margin in presidential politics.
One day after the election, on November 7 2012, Sean Hannity announced, on his conservative television program, that he would support comprehensive immigration reform. That was a dramatic change from when he supported self-deportation, a large border fence, and a rogue state immigration law like SB 1070 in Arizona.
He may have had an overnight revelation. But it is more likely that he read the exit polls during the night and could not go back to sleep.
It doesn't matter if the GOP changed its stance on immigration for the purposes of self-preservation. A political party should adapt to the conditions of the country. But more importantly, we now have the opportunity to pass a bipartisan immigration bill.
With this GOP cooperation, a path for citizenship can be laid out for millions of immigrants. And it does not have to be amnesty. President Obama wants to include penalties for those who have came here in violations of our current immigration laws. There could be a fine and a mandate to pay back taxes.
These criteria combined with strict border enforcement, employment verification, and a tough stance on felonious immigrants leads to comprehensive reform, which works for everyone.
Back in the 19th Century, an argument was made for equality in labor. Hinton Helper eloquently stated that, "the causes which have impeded the progress and prosperity of The South, which have dwindled our commerce, and other similar pursuits, into the most contemptible insignificance; sunk a large majority of our people in galling poverty and ignorance, entailed upon us a humiliating dependence on the Free States; may all be traced to one common source, Slavery."
In a way, undocumented labor has become similar to slavery. And like slavery, undocumented labor only hurts the economy. Undocumented workers depress wages, make products less safe, and encourage an atmosphere of shadow and noncompliance. Could you imagine what would happen if these individuals paid taxes and became citizens?
Economists already have. The United States GDP would increase $1.5 trillion over 10 years and federal revenues would increase $4.5 billion in the first three years. It sounds like the tea party should talk with Hannity if they are serious about deficit reduction.
Comprehensive immigration reform is good for everyone, economically and morally. This is not the time to fight about a fence or the possibility that the US will become a "magnet" for illegals. Necesitamos una reforma ahora!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)