Two speakers have impressed me in the last two days. On Monday night, I went to hear Laura Tyson, Berkeley Professor and advisor to the Obama White House, speak about the economy. In wonderfully understandable language, Dr. Tyson explained to a packed auditorium the current state of the economy, and outlined the central worrying points for the future. Most impressive to me was her commentary that the primary cause of future deficit growth and credit squeeze in the United States is not the immediate crisis, but is rather our “structural deficit,” the built-in conditions that were present before the crisis and which will outlive it—the fact that most of our budget is made up of commitments which we have built into current law….defense, entitlements and interest on the national debt. These three comprise something in excess of 70% of our spending and cannot be reversed without structural sacrifice.
Dr. Tyson was not optimistic about our ability to solve this problem, primarily because, as she put it, there is no bi-partisanship in our national government. Because we are so polarized on the right and left, neither side will compromise, and the ultimate result of that condition is a continuation of the status-quo, a condition that will most certainly sink our ship of state. Her solution: A small bipartisan group of congress to fashion a plan that will cost everyone something, but which will allow us the flexibility to escape from certain economic catastrophe within the next twenty years. This group’s plan would then be put to a vote by congress…up or down, and the problem could be solved or at least mitigated. Again, she was not hopeful that this format would be adopted.
On Tuesday night, President Obama outlined his plan for Afghanistan—an escalation with a deadline—a plan he believes can succeed without burying the United States in yet another quagmire of seemingly endless war on foreign soil. Predictably, and in the form presaged by Dr. Tyson, both the right and the left immediately attacked the plan. There was no bipartisanship in the response, no expression of appreciation for the President’s pain-staking process, his effort to create a shared context for the decision or his obvious wish that such a decision did not have to be taken at all. Consciously sending people to their deaths is a nearly unbearable burden, yet he courageously, with a perspective of the ages, ordered our nation and our military to pay that price.
I was inspired by both of these folks. Whether we agree with the specifics or not, we can respect the courage it takes to tell people the truth and to step up with a plan to solve a devastating problem—it is what leadership is made of. Who among us reading this blog would step into the President’s shoes? Or who would have the courage to suggest that we are spending ourselves into oblivion and then advocate a plan to end it, knowing full well that “both sides” would open fire with full loads of ammo manufactured by their own partisan point of view?
This is a time for inspiration, a time for us to grasp something larger than ourselves or our individual interest. Our values as a nation are worth our support, and definitely worth giving up some pieces of our own opinions to support those we have entrusted with our destiny.
One Comment
Thank you for this valuable post. It changed my idea.
Post a Comment