After reading the complaints about Romney, I asked friends who have seen the candidate speak locally. They say he does speak in specifics about what he would do about America’s problems, on some issues. On just some issues, I ask? Yes, but we know what he is going to do. He’s going to change everything Obama has done. He can’t, I say. That just isn’t practical. How will he unwind so much that is now law? Their description of the change in administration sounds like nothing we’ve seen in America since ending the spoils system with the Pendleton Act in the 1880s. I say, he really cannot throw all the bums out, my dear. And the mass of law, the mass of regulation, some is good and some is awful and some contradicts or is redundant — how will anyone sort through it all coherently? Oh, I thought, the website will give more specific policy suggestions. There are a few. Here’s what he says he can do:
If you go to the Romney website there are some specifics, but I was shocked that I had to dig around for the “issues” page. There it is. I am presenting it as a public service. There are some specifics, but much is vague promise or things like the above, “Give every family access to a great school and good teachers”. How is any president going to do that? He didn’t hire my daughter’s lousy history teacher from last year and apparently no one can get rid of the inept loon once he’s hired. Yet there are specifics, such as “Allow Low Income And Special Needs Students To Choose Which School To Attend By Making Title I and IDEA Funds Portable.” and “Expand The DC Opportunity Scholarship Program To Serve As A Model For The Nation.”
The worst part about the Issues sections is that each set of solutions is prefaced with a long whine about what Obama did wrong. We know all that. Randomly choosing another topic of peruse I see that in Afghanistan & Pakistan a key proposal is to “Ensure Buy-In from Afghan and Pakistani Governments”. How is he going to do that? Haven’t the last two administrations attempted to do just that without apparent success? We’ll use leverage. Fine. If that doesn’t work, as it hasn’t, what then? Romney’s essay today in the WSJ on “A New Course for the Middle East” doesn’t mention either Afghanistan or Pakistan. Iraq, either, what a mess and we are still entangled in it. Perhaps strength is enough, but how to build our “sinews”? If it is about money used like a protein drink with steroid supplements, then we’ve got a problem.
I am posting this also as a response to my friend John Lewis’s comment on my previous post and because of my friends mentioned above, as well as because of a student paper that insisted that Romney’s website answered all questions about his policy proposals, while the guys here say Romney never addresses policy specifics. I couldn’t reconcile the divergence between the praise of Romney as statesman and despair about Romney as obfuscating politician. I want to like Romney. I particularly do not want to have to dislike him. Giving up on Romney for whatever reason does not seem an option given the other option which is not four more years, but four years of what the president considers a mandate to go full throttle on what he has hesitantly begun. No thank you.
October 1st, 2012 | 12:50 pm
Thanks Kate. I don’t think this all that bad (though the fact that you had to dig for it is really bad). What I think it lacks is some sensible organization in terms of cause and effect. It would seem to me that the logical order in terms of cause and effect would be this:
Cut the Deficit
Champion Small Businesses
Energy Independence
Trade That Works
Skills to Succeed
More Jobs and More Take Home Pay
Organized this way, the fact that most of these proposals are so vague and ambiguous would be a lot less bothersome.
October 1st, 2012 | 6:08 pm
I will wager “Mitt Romney’s Plan” was written by an advertising copywriter who would not know ordure from apple butter.
This sort of thing is depressing. Now recall the counsels of the lapsed professor of political science who used to edit this publication: “independent voters” tend to be low-information voters who make the most superficial judgments about candidates (e.g. “she reminds me of my first wife”). The intelligence they have is invested in matters other than civic life.
Campaigns stink because the candidates are competing for the attention of the uninterested.
October 1st, 2012 | 7:02 pm
The “Issues” link I offer above has more specific information on more subjects.
I am trying not to think of the election or any of this that I wrote about as depressing. I read somewhere that more people are interested in this election than usual. Are they frightened or are other things less entertaining this year? The good news was that those more interested than usual were more likely to vote Republican by a good margin. We can hope that’s good news. No, I’ll put that differently. I feel I need to hope that’s good news.
October 1st, 2012 | 8:23 pm
Look under the ‘tax’ and ‘spending’ headings. He cannot reconcile all of the conflicting impulses manifest therein and I would wager he knows that. I will cast a ballot for Romney in the wan hope that he conceives of this as so much cotton candy and will propose a serious plan for fiscal consolidation once he enters office (something the current incumbent simply refuses to do).
October 2nd, 2012 | 5:40 am
A couple of ideas about this with my morning coffee.
1. Romney knows we will trust his economic advisers more than we trust Obama’s. Obama’s guys have proven such disasters that even he is saying he will replace at least Geithner in the second term.
2. Corporations, all large businesses are sitting on large cash reserves because they aren’t sure they won’t need them. They are not confident of what Obama & Co. will do (to them?) and they are behaving defensively. Really, who can blame them? But Romney is coming in as pro-business and those funds will become aggressive capital for those businesses then, won’t it? That will grow the economy and economic growth will make some things possible that aren’t possible now.
October 5th, 2012 | 2:35 am
The never again Obama vote leaves us with the choice of Romney. However, the debate and seeing Romney and Ryan live have given me a clear choice for change and hope as they have laid out a very clear path. No candidate ever can hope to get into the specifics of each and every part of the plan because when one gets into office in a Republic, one has to make some compromises and laying out the full details of one’s position on every issue allows the other side to move you further away from the goal. Also, most of the electorate lives in the world of soundbites and twitter and thus little is to be gained by a serious exposition on every issue. The media grabs one small part and makes that the story. However, if big bird was running against Obama, we would be smart to support Big Bird over the empty chair/podium.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact