Much of a Muchness?

For better or worse the presidential election in the USA is importance to Australians. Perhaps not quite as important as it would have been if JWH was still in the seat. We wont necessarily have all of our foreign policy decisions made in Washington any more but the Americans will continue to be our 'close friends'. We will still watch a lot of their TV programs, listen to their music and suck up some of the sillier elements of their culture.

The question then is which one should we support? It might not matter all that much given that we don't have a vote but I shouldn't let that bother you too much - on past form the majority of citizens who have the right to vote wont bother anyway.

Those of us used to the nice little short cut of party politics need to get used to the system in the USA. They do have parties and these parties have broad policy positions but no discipline. Unfortunately, they are so broad as to be pretty much useless as a method of determining a preference, unless your level of interest is pretty basic. If that is what you are after then the most progressive mob are the Democrats and the Republicans (or the GOP) are the right wingers.

For more precise policy positions you need to go to the candidates.

This is where it can get tricky. You would be forgiven for concluding on the basis of most of the coverage that policies are really not what this is all about. Barack is young and black, Hillary is a bit older, white and a woman and John is even older, a Vietnam vet and POW and very long term legislator. It is really all about the race between these three. Their policies aren't apparently all that important. Whether they stumble, speak well, act like leaders and say the right things about God are all important.

In the way in which we sometimes set up tests for others, I have had the view for some time that the USA might just be starting to grow up when it has the courage to elect a black or a woman as President. With Condoleeza Rice as Secretary of State there has been the chance that the Republicans could get the double up. That possibility didn't do a lot for my test but I still like the idea that the President may not be an old, white man.

It looks as though there are now three viable candidates - John McCain, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. I have checked out what seem to be their policies against some criteria of my own.

Propensity for War Mongering
John is the son and grandson of admirals and was a navy man himself. After he experienced a bombing - friendly fire - on an aircraft carrier where over 130 people were killed he said that we wondered whether he should keep dropping these things on the North Vietnamese. He was able to put that view behind him and now supports the Iraq War, jokes about 'Bomb, bomb, bomb - Bomb Bomb Iran' (to the tune of the Beach Boys tune). He suggests that the US could be in Iraq for 100 years.

Barack didn't support the invasion of Iraq - but he generally doesn't mention that he wasn't in the Senate when the decision was taken so didn't have a vote in any case. He wants to get out of Iraq but he doesn't really put up much of a plan for doing so. Curiously, he has said that he would invade Pakistan if it was necessary to get at terrorists.

Hillary voted to allow the invasion of Iraq. She now wants out but her plan for getting out doesn't seem to be much more coherent than Barack's. She does have the benefit of some pretty skillful policy advice on the issue.

Universal Health Care
Millions of people are uninsured with millions more under insured.

John is going to rely on private insurers to do better.

It looks as though Barack is going to require that children be insured, assuming that if they have to insure their children then people will automatically insure themselves. The logic is not strong.

Hillary is looking for a universal system - although hopefully slightly more effective than the one she tried for last time she was in the White House.

Death Penalty
John supports it.

Barack supports it.

Hillary supports it - but she has sponsored a bill that would require positive DNA results for all before execution. Not really the point but it could do some good.

Education
John thinks schools are heading in the wrong direction.

Barack and Hillary are strong on education and are supporters of public education.

Abortion
John has been a long time supporter of Roe v Wade but has recently shifted his position to say that it should be overturned.

Barack is on record as supporting Roe v Wade.

Hillary supports Roe v Wade although she is personally opposed to abortion as a form of birth control.

Firearms
John is rated by the NRA as an enemy.

Barack is rated by the NRA as an enemy.

Hillary rated by the NRA as an enemy.

Commitment to Free Trade
None seem to make any comment that gives a lead.

Experience
John was elected to the House of Representatives in 1982 and has been a Congressman or Senator ever since. Ran for President in 2000.

Barack was elected to the Senate in 2004.

Hillary was elected to the Senate in 2000. She was in the White House as First Lady for 8 years.




There are many other criteria that could be listed.

I suppose some of their positions say more about the USA than the candidates themselves.