Every government ever formed presents its governed with a particularly insidious danger. The danger I speak of is one which must be guarded against with the utmost vigor and vigilance by the people. When, in our daily lives, we get to the point where we cannot possibly know the truth about the dangers we face, tyranny will surely be just around the corner. We find ourselves complacent and at the mercy of our political class, those who secure their living off the sweat and blood of those they claim to serve.
To trust the political class implicitly is foolishness bordering upon the insane. Those entrusted with the operation of government are pulled by conflicting influences which do not often align their interests with those of the people they govern. Once elected, their focus becomes the short term security of their source of power and influence and the best interests of the nation hold little sway over their actions. For example, today our budget deficit has reached $9 trillion. As large as that number is it is dwarfed by the $50 trillion in unfunded liabilities in Social Security and Medicare which will come due in the decades to come. In their eagerness to secure power our political class has repeatedly put off dealing with the elephant in the room which now threatens the financial stability of the entire system. Rather than deal with the coming crisis the politicians we have sent to Washington have, without fail, simply expanded the role of government and squandered our tax dollars on programs which encourage dependence upon the government. Well, the day of reckoning is coming and those seeking the highest office are absolutely unwilling to speak to the American people with candor. Rather, they continue to give us the status quo and simply allow the problem to grow like a cancer eating away at the very future of our nation.
At best we have a political class which is too inept to face the challenge and childishly chooses to hide from the problem in the hopes that some future generation will solve it for them. At worst we are facing a political class which has become fat with the ambition for power, who sees the coming crisis as an opportunity to secure greater control over the population. This second possibility is all the more dangerous when faced with the changes to our law enforcement apparatus made to fight our "war on terror". With these new laws going onto the books, like the Patriot Act and H.R 1955, we are facing an increasingly ominous strangle hold on political dissent.
The Bush administration has become a pariah, a sort of universally recognized evil for the public to focus its political rage. The invasion of Iraq and the perceived loss of civil liberties has gained the attention of the public. They are eager for change and yet I question whether we will really get change given the current state of the system. The primary season is drawing to a close and the two dominating parties are close to finalizing their nominations for president and yet the only candidates that rise to the top of the political heap offer us no real choice, only the same old tired sound bites and policies.
The hatred of the current administration has provided the backdrop upon which Barack Obama has been projected with a sort of messianic glory. People so desperate for change, so hungry for a different direction think that he has walked onto the political stage as a savior. But, is he really offering us change that will save us from the looming financial collapse? Is he really offering us a more humble foreign policy with military designed to protect the people of the United States rather than one designed to maintain an empire that benefits the large multi-national corporations for whom national interests are of little consequence?
Let us first look at the issue of our looming financial crisis. Our current Social Security and Medicare programs are faced with a $50 Trillion future liability, which is today completely unfunded. Yet, Obama wants to add to this unfunded mountain of future liabilities by creating yet another entitlement program in the form of universal health care. Obama's belief is that government can intervene to force medical providers to provide better more cost effective care. What exactly does that mean and how is this going to be done? According to documentation on his website he plans to mandate that hospitals and providers prove that they provide quality care. He says this can be done by linking a providers payment with reported quality. This will require a whole new crop of government bureaucrats, the prospect of which does not bode well for reducing costs. Beyond the cost incurred by this expansion of the government his plan is going to require an expansion in hospital staff needed to collect this mandated data. In the end his plan is full of promise and light on details, especially when it comes to cost. In his book, The Revolution, Ron Paul eloquently outlines the stark nature of this coming crisis in Social Security and Medicaid.
David Walker, the comptroller general at the U.S. Government Accountability Office, tells us that Social Security and Medicare are headed for disaster because of demographic trends and rising health care costs. The number of younger taxpayers for each older retiree will continue to decline. The demand for "free" prescription drugs under Medicare will explode. If present trends continue, by 2040 the entire federal budget will be consumed by Social Security and Medicare. Fort percent of our entire private-sector output will need to go to just these two programs. The only options for balancing the budget would be cutting total federal spending by about 60 percent, or doubling federal taxes. Furthermore, Walker asserts, we cannot grow our way out of this problem. Faster economic growth can only delay the inevitable hard choices. To close the long-term entitlement gap, the U.S. economy would have to grow by double digits every year for the next 75 years.
Faced with this situation how can Obama in good conscience make the promises he is making? His goals are nothing more than empty promises that, if anything, will only hasten the coming crisis without offering us any chance of really solving the problem. Obama talks about paying for the new program in part through the repeal of the tax cuts which will have a negative impact on the economy and will fall short of paying for this grand new plan, let alone even provide a drop in the bucket towards funding our future liabilities in Social Security and Medicaid. But, perhaps Obama wants to help pay for this new system through a reduced military presence abroad?
Not based on his discussion of his foreign policy aspirations outlined on his website. In a speech to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs Barack Obama said
No President should ever hesitate to use force - unilaterally if necessary - to protect ourselves and our vital interests when we are attacked or imminently threatened. But when we use force in situations other than self-defense, we should make every effort to garner the clear support and participation of others - the kind of burden-sharing and support President George H.W. Bush mustered before he launched Operation Desert Storm.
This indicates that he is not against using our military in the exercise of maintaining our overseas empire. I have seen no indication that he would save tax payer money by removing the troops we have scattered around the globe in 130 countries. Obama talks about creating a military force for the 21st century but is oddly silent on the subject of continuing to pay for this global military presence. Beyond the matter of our military expenditures abroad, it would seem the matter of the $2.6 Billion in economic and military aid to Israel is another sacred cow which he would be unwilling to touch. On his website under foreign policy his campaign says:
Barack Obama has consistently supported foreign assistance to Israel. He defends and supports the annual foreign aid package that involves both military and economic assistance to Israel and has advocated increased foreign aid budgets to ensure that these funding priorities are met. He has called for continuing U.S. cooperation with Israel in the development of missile defense systems.
Continuing to pump military aid to the most technologically advanced nation in the Middle East, one who reportedly has over 200 nuclear warheads and the missile technology to deliver them anywhere in the region, hardly seems the way to bring about a peaceful solution to the never ending battle between Israel and her neighbors. Israel is perfectly capable of defending herself, and if faced with the loss of this $2.6 Billion in foreign aid might be more willing to find a solution to the issues she faces with the Palestinians. Beyond the financial impact this support has on our budget, it weakens our ability to act as a diplomatic broker for peace in the region and is an inappropriate transfer of the fruits of hard working American labor and to what gain?
As much as I would like to say Obama is an agent of change he is not. He is more of the same tired political rhetoric of the past to which he mixes in a dash of hope by talking about extracting us from the mess in Iraq, removing all combat troops from the country within 16 months of his taking office. While that sounds promising I find him wanting when it comes to the larger issues of returning us to a sound foreign policy advocated by our founding fathers. Add to this the fact that he is unwilling to address the even greater danger of the coming financil meltdown in Social Security and Medicare, and I find my self asking why is he so keen to say "Yes we can"?
Comments