Not my words obviously, but I thought it was better than quoting Razorlight. That particular lyric also sums up what America stands for; The Land of Opportunity, The Land of Hope and Glory, The Land of the Free etc etc. Now the cynic within wants to add a couple of footnotes to those particular claims, but I will try to suppress the urge for now. I’ll be honest I’m not sure where this post is going really, I’ve been wanting to write something about the Good Ol’ US of A for a while, without really knowing what. So, bear with me.
Firstly, I have never been to America. Indeed, I am yet to leave Europe. However, why should that stop me sharing my opinion?! There are a few things I want to talk about really, Gun culture being one, the political system and forthcoming election, and George Bush.
Let’s start with the Gun Culture. I remember about 8 weeks ago, when the most recent University shooting took place, I really wanted to write something but never really got round to it. Initially the first reports I read and saw on the news ran the headlines about the tragedy being linked to the ever increasing gun problem within the USA. But very quickly the emphasis of the reports changed, focussing instead on alleged police incompetence for failing to evacuate the campus after the initial shooting. If you remember the Student then returned some 45 minutes later and killed a dozen or more people.
I am not here to judge the actions of the police; I have no experience of such situations to be able to comment. However, I felt at the time, and still feel now, that more should have been made about the fact that a University student was able to obtain automatic weapons. This is not the first time this has happened; it is becoming sadly a rather regular occurrence in the USA. Earlier this year an Amish community was victim to a similar tragedy. The thing that annoys me most is that each time it happens the first thing we here is that “the right to bear arms is a fundamental part of our constitution”. That, in a strictly literal sense, is true. It is the Second Amendment. However, I find it hard to believe that the founding fathers imagined it being used in this way. In the USA there are more weapons in private ownership than there are people, so although it may well be part of the constitution, something doesn’t add up. How far are we to stretch the Land of the Free mantra, free to shoot whoever you want with whatever weapon you choose?
The right to bear arms is the Second Amendment of the US Constitution. In my understanding of the English language, and maybe this is where the confusion arises in the States, the word Amendment implies it wasn’t part of the initial constitution, but was added at a later date. As such, it is hardly a fundamental part of the constitution. Secondly, it is an Amendment, so, why not amend it?!
Right, politics. This is becoming a bit of a theme to this blog really isn’t it, maybe I have too much time on my hands over here! I admit that there are aspects of the American system that confuse me, some aspects that revolt me, some that make me laugh and some I just don’t understand. So, any mistakes I make here are purely the fault of the incomplete British education system, and not my own!
The American Presidency lasts for four years, with a maximum of eight years being possible. That, for a start is a bit strange in my opinion. That means that every eight years there is bound to be some kind of major regime change, which is not great for stability. Take the example of Clinton, for all his faults he presided over 8 years of sensible economic policy, only to see Dubya come along and blow an Iraq sized hole in the treasury. That Bush was even elected is another thing I don’t understand, it is all down to the Electoral College system.
As I understand it, on election day all the Americans who are slim enough to leave their house and clever enough to tick a box (around 90million) go to vote. They “choose” the candidate they want their state to vote for. Yes, you read that right. If the majority of people in Ohio vote for the Democrat candidate for example, that means that the state appointed elector is “pledged” to vote for that candidate. By the way, the “pledge” is not legally binding! In total there are 538 state appointed electors in the country. The number of electors per state is equal to the number of elected members that state has in the House of Representatives. All of which means that votes in one state could count more than in another. That is the American version of Democracy.
To illustrate just how stupid that is, take the following example.
3 million Texans vote for the Republican candidate, 2 million vote for the Democrat. So the state of Texas votes republican. Texas has 34 votes, out of the total of 538.
Over in Maine 1 million voters vote Democrat, giving them the majority. Maine has 4 votes, out of a total of 538.
So, three times as many people vote republican, but that translates to almost ten times as many of the final votes. I understand that there may be many more Texans than there are natives of Maine, but the votes for each state do not correspond directly to the population.
So, what could happen, in theory, is that one candidate could be so unpopular in 39 states that he does not win one single vote, yet scrape home with a majority of one in 11 states and be elected president. The important states are:
CaliforniaNew YorkTexasFloridaPennsylvaniaIllinoisOhioMichiganNew JerseyNorth CarolinaGeorgiaVirginia
The question that has to be asked here is this- Is it still democracy if you can lose the popular vote and still win the election? In my opinion, no. It is also worth remembering this when you listen to pro-war propaganda justifying the invasion of various countries in the hope of introducing democracy to the people. This is particularly amusing in the case of various countries in the Middle East which used to have democratically elected leaders until the post war period where the US financially backed military coups in order to guarantee favourable oil supplies and prices!
The next election is 16 months away, but already the fight has begun to win the party nomination. The candidates from both sides have been travelling across the country canvassing for support in various key states. 16 months before the actual election, there are already candidates who are dropping out of the running, some through lack of support, and some through lack of funds. Becoming President of the USA is an expensive affair; it helps to have rich friends, or rich family. If not you have to raise the funds through private sources, usually from business men in return for favours, positions in government, or presidential pardons should they end up on the wrong side of the law. We are talking about tens of millions of dollars simply to run as a candidate. Again, not my idea of democracy. Sure anyone can raise the money in theory, but it helps to have connections. As such, you don’t necessarily need brains, policies, or political experience to become President, but rather a good campaign manager, a good tailor, a private jet and a load of cash.
Like I said, its sixteen months away, but I may as well have a little look at the candidates while I’m here. And it will be funny to look back and see how bad my predictions were!
Hilary Clinton – strong favourite to win the Democratic Candidacy, obvious advantage that Old Bill was much loved, and she is highly regarded in the Senate. On the downside, she hasn’t got Bill’s charisma, cant play the sax and I’m not sure she likes cigars. It would be a huge occasion if she became the first female president, and maybe that is what the country needs.
Barak Obama – Not too far behind Hilary at the moment, but strangely struggling in the South, where he expected to do well. His policies are taking shape, he has raised the most cash, though he is a tad opportunistic and jumps on bandwagons fairly quickly, but he is a new kind of politician in the States, young, energetic and potentially the first black president. Again, it would be a huge change.
Rudolph Giuliani – Republican front runner, strong support in Republican heartlands, but little chance anywhere else. He’s a brash New Yorker with Italian roots, hardly President material, or is he? Little opposition in the Republican Party so should gain the vote to run.
John McCain - A veteran of the Presidential race, lost the support of his campaign team, is broke, supports the war and is pushing 80. Probably has a good chance then!
There are others of course, but I think it will be a straight choice between Obama and Clinton. Personally, I’d like to see Obama win, but I think Clinton will. What odds on President Clinton and Vice President Obama I wonder? There may of course be a twist in the tale, and an independent may run and win, Michael Bloomberg has dropped hints, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see Al Gore have another pop.
Right, George Bush can wait for now, I will eventually get around to writing something about him, just not yet!
Ok, talk to you all soon!
No comments:
Post a Comment