E Pluribus Unum (Poliblog)

I've dropped off a bit from blogging in the last couple of weeks. I suppose it's a combination of being busy and feeling uninspired. From a political perspective, I should have been blogging about the two hottest topics in politics today: Healthcare Reform and White House Beers. But the former is such a big issue with so many layers, and the second one is just, well, ridiculous. The front pages of both the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal feature above-the-fold photos from yesterday's happy hour (I'm sure other papers followed suit - those are just the two we get at work). I love beer very much, but I find it very hard to believe that the reconciliatory beer fest is the most-deserving item to be featured on today's front pages.

Regarding Healthcare, I've had the opportunity to have a number of really good conversations around the issue in the last few weeks (as well as before that), and it brings me to a theme that is fairly recurrent in this blog: Good people on both sides of the aisle need to learn to talk to one another. If you can get past the yelling and name-calling, you'll find that there are Republicans and Democrats, Liberals and Conservatives who all have souls and good hearts and even good intentions who simply disagree. And if you can get beyond the noise, you can usually understand the opposition a bit better, which is always good starting ground for compromise and, ya know, progress. Remember when you were a kid and you and your sibling were fighting, and your mom made you look each other in the eye and talk out what you were feeling? You were usually able to get past the yelling and crying and get back to building things out of legos together. At least this was true in my experience.

I'm of the opinion that something can be done that both protects our current private system and the freedom of the marketplace, but can also provide care for those who just can't access that system. We're a great and prosperous nation, and we should be able to take care of our people. I'll even go as far as to say that I don't think the solution HAS to be governmental. But I'm of the opinion that it can be, and that it might be the best way, right now, to ensure that all people have access to whatever program is created.

My conservative friends are of the opinion that government should do as little as possible, and that a largely unfettered and unrestricted market will best take care of society's ills as the economy expands and jobs are created, etc. And they see the government's move into the healthcare field as just another hindrance to the free market, one that the government will "screw up like they always do." The people I've been fortunate enough to talk to or listen in on really believe, I think, that people will be better off if the government stays out of healthcare.

So, really, we both want the same thing. And the best solution would be a compromise between the competing factions. (I realize my more ideological readers will disagree with this). This is what democracy is about. When you have a multitude of voices, there will rarely be unanimity, but there can be "e pluribus unum." So why is it that we can't get past the shouting and learn to work together? Really. Why?

I would argue that our reliance on the two-party system does it. Simple logic tells us that if you have two parties, one or the other will always have a majority. And, since people usually grow tired of the people in power, the minority knows they just have to wait it out until its their turn again. Well, wait it out and spend all their time decrying the majority. The Democrats did this earlier this decade, and the Republicans are doing it now. My question is: why do we not demand more? Why do we not refuse to re-elect people who have failed to represent us well?

I'd really like to see some civil discourse in politics. I'd like to see some compromises. I'd like to see some solutions that we can all live with, not just tolerate until the other side gets power and reverses as much as they can. I'd like to see "e pluribus unum."

And yes, I do realize this was a very idealistic post.