The Choice 2012

This is a quick rundown of the most important governmental and social issues on my radar, and which candidate matches my leanings on each. Part of my reasoning here is that the president can make significant contributions to any issue and plays a part in many of the country’s policies, but he does not make law or set policy himself for the most part, so even if I disagree with particular points, I don’t always consider them deal breakers.

This feels short and simplistic, but longer disquisitions are likely to go unread and become overly complicated. I’m unlikely to be swayed by arguments attempting to change my mind on these issues before tomorrow: what I’m trying to decide is which presidential candidate I would be happier to see in office.

Abortion: This is a key issue for me (though, obviously, not my single issue). I am against abortion in all but the classic conservative points: rape, incest, and the life of the mother exemptions. I believe life begins at conception, indeed, and every cut-off point I’ve heard proposed is not based on morals or ethics, but convenience. I was disappointed that Obama promised to make abortions legal but rare (a preferable alternative to legal and common, as they are now), which had a better chance of success than attempts to outlaw the practice under current conditions. He has not shown any initiative to carry that ideal through.

You know what gets my goat, though? The complaint leveled by many liberals is spot on: conservatives want these restrictions, but do little to help those who are struggling and who are the most vulnerable when it comes to carrying pregnancy to term in difficult circumstances. Things that ought to be included with any campaign to end abortion are a far greater support for single mothers, much greater funding for the support services that aid those mothers as well as child care and adoption options and assistance, and real accountability for fathers. That last is especially egregious. I’m not certain how to go about it, but making certain fathers are financially and socially responsible for their own offspring is vital. If we mean what we say when we claim that all life is precious, then we had best do out best to provide for those lives in every way we can.

Candidate: Romney

Marriage: The least important issue on my radar, but an issue nonetheless. I’m increasingly of the camp that says that the government should get out of marriage altogether: make all couplings (and the inevitable future triplings and so on) civil unions; hand marriage exclusively to social organizations (usually, churches) to make their own rules. Historically, this has been the model until the recent era.

That said, I’m still against same-sex marriages. I’m not prepared to overturn history, logic, and my faith to choose otherwise, and I think a government that endorses it is headed down the wrong path. No, my marriage is not threatened when others marry; yes, the definition of the term is in jeopardy when it begins to be applied to whatever we feel like. (If the term itself wasn’t important, there wouldn’t’ be such a fight over it.)

Candidate: Romney

Supreme Court: This may not be on everyone’s radar, but there’s a high likelihood that the next president will appoint at least one Supreme Court justice during his term. Given that I’m a conservative when it comes to legal interpretation, I’m guessing that Romney would put in a justice I think more acceptable than Obama’s probable pick. (Though given the likelihood of a slim Republican majority congress, the candidate who makes it through is likely to be pretty moderate in any case.)

Candidate: Romney

Economy: Like many items on the list, this one’s a toss-up. I do think Romney knows how to run a business, so I think he’d have a handle on things economic. On the flip side, I am not convinced he’d help anyone except business owners and corporations—the latter needs some help but not all of it; the former need little to no help at all. I’m terrified of Romney’s drive to reduce restrictions and regulations (which were put in place for a reason) and aid corporate interests at every turn. I’m also not convinced Romney’s numbers add up.

Obama hasn’t been the engine of change that I would like to see, but things have been improving under his watch and I think they would continue to do so. I don’t think that it would have been possible for anyone to turn things around in just four years, and steady recovery is workable. I’m somewhat disturbed by the tendency of folks to vote directly based on how they, personally, are doing economically, rather than looking at the bigger picture of the economy as a whole. I am not against taxes that go toward helping others. (Though I’ve heard the argument that if we paid fewer taxes, we’d have more to give to charity, I haven’t seen it—and government welfare was established to help precisely because private giving was not covering the needs of many. When tax returns show up, I rarely hear people crowing about how they can now make bigger donations to help others…)

Candidate: Obama (probably)

Education: Obama is the clear winner here. His dedication to education seems far stronger than Romney’s, and while Romney may have some useful reforms in mind, his general lack of interest in the subject and his dismissive attitude don’t lead me to think that things would get better on that front. Romney’s push to weaken unions also disturbs me: to take the guidance of education out of the hands of those who actually educate is not wise. Two areas of public interest in particular, I think, cannot be run like businesses: education and health care. I believe Romney would run both of them as such, and the results will be ugly.

Candidate: Obama

Energy: This is tied strongly to the next issue of the environment, but again it seems as if Romney’s agenda is to pump money into the economy at any cost, even if it means pushing wasteful and dangerous energy sources, and his desire to do away with restrictions is frightening. Green energy is going to be required in the future—the experts only disagree on the timing. The more we invest in such technologies now, the better off we will be in the future. There will be some parts of the economy that will suffer, as there always will be. Obama’s policies are more sustainable and less damaging.

Candidate: Obama

Environment: This is a big one for me, and the evidence all leads to one side. Yes, trees and owls and mice do matter as part of the ecosystem. There may be tweaks to be made to accommodate industry and nature, and serious consideration to be given to employment, but Romney’s desire to do away with restrictions for pollution and resource extraction, and his goal of opening up the wild lands that remain in our country to more industrial exploitation, makes me ill. As with so many things, we are sacrificing long-term stability for immediate gains, and we are already paying some of the cost: I fear that the future costs will be unsustainable. While I’m not completely convinced that global warming is entirely human-caused, evidence suggests that it is at least partly true, and if I’m not certain, I would far rather play it safe than be sorry later. Those who suggest that, since it hasn’t been proven in their minds, we should continue as if it isn’t a possibility seem incredibly short-sighted to me.

Candidate: Obama

Health Care: Sorry, conservative friends: this is one that I am quite liberal on. I’d rather have my options severely reduced if it meant providing basic services to everyone. I don’t know if I’d call health care a right, but it is a service that should be available to all. The only reason I don’t like Obamacare is that I’d rather see a single-payer plan. It was a real blessing in Canada when we lived there, and I’d go for it in a minute here. The argument that it cuts down on competition and innovation doesn’t seem to hold water, and I have faith that universities and corporations will still pursue health care even if they can only earn large profits rather than the staggering profits they are seeing now.

Candidate: Obama

Immigration: I’m utterly undecided on this one. On one hand, I think we need stronger enforcement of immigration law, and I don’t have the same problems with efforts such as those in Arizona that some do. Sneaking into the country, for whatever reason, is illegal: it may be understandable, but we don’t let people off the hook for other crimes just because they had good reason to commit them. If your family is hungry and you steal, that may be understandable; you still get charged with theft. Those who argue that such laws—and those policies recently unveiled in California—are deporting people for minor infractions are missing the point: they are being deported for minor infractions committed after breaking the law to enter the country. I have great compassion for those born into difficult circumstances, but from a civic standpoint, much as it might be desirable to help every soul, a country’s resources are limited, and as a political entity,  government must attend to its own citizens first.

On the other hand, something does have to be done with the vast number of illegal immigrants we have now. Denying them services does not normally force them to re-emigrate; it just creates a huge underclass who have no other options than crime. I don’t know if the DREAM Act is an answer, but some form of amnesty has to be put in place for people already here coupled with stronger enforcement. I don’t know, from the candidates’ shifty answers and minimum effort to actually deal with this problem, who would do the better job here.

Candidate: ?

Foreign Policy: The candidates presented themselves as so closely aligned on these issues that the choice seems almost immaterial. Obama certainly engenders more goodwill overseas, and Romney’s gaffes have been ridiculous. Though Romney has the stronger stance on Israel (which is important to me, though not as apocalyptically important as it is to many others of my acquaintance), both have pledge support to that nation, and the complaints leveled against Obama on that score have been relatively slight (though not immaterial, and certainly worrying). I might regret either choice depending on what happens in the next four years, but based on what’s happened so far, I can’t suss out who comes out on top here.

Candidate: ?

Role of Government: Again, a toss-up. I’ve been very disturbed by some of Obama’s moves on this score, including the assault on moral objections to provisions of health care and his insistence on some government programs that seem wasteful. On the other hand, Romney’s stripped-down version of government—which seems to exist solely as an aid to business—scares me almost as much. A hands-off government which backs the power of the dollar before people, or one whose octopus-like tentacles reach into every area of life: which one is worse? I haven’t figured that out yet.

Candidate: ?

So Obama wins on points, but some of the points that favor Romney have a higher priority. Where are the scales to weigh this out?

What is it that ultimately scares me?

Under Romney, a country where my moral values are upheld, but many against them become militant in the face of seeming dismissal by the powers that be. A country ravaged environmentally by business interests. A country that puts corporate interests above social welfare and trades in long-term stability for today’s gratification. A country that leaves its poor to become poorer and helps its rich to become richer. A country where education and health care are up for sale, and the losers are cut off as unprofitable.

Under Obama, a country that continues to slip down the slide of relativism, where my morals are more and more seen as dangerous attacks on the selfhood and dignity of others rather than ethical statements. A country in which the government overpowers our freedoms in the name of safety and security. A country where everything is allowed and celebrated, save for disapproval, and conscience is trumped by political correctness. A country in which the government’s hand is in every transaction and bureaucrats decide what is best for me and mine.

So: what do I do on Tuesday?