Well, it took me a moment to decide to write on the State of the Union. Mostly because I wanted to absorb the information before I started to pick it apart. Of course, it was not the only reason I decided to wait. By the time I heard the Republican response to the SOTU, I was livid. So angry, in fact, that I called my best friend to rant about the nonsense. Don't get me wrong, I liked the SOTU. I think it had a lot of ideas with a lot of potential, given the right circumstances, but let's not get ahead of ourselves here. First, we must discuss the key points of the SOTU.
The first section of the SOTU that I'd like to discuss is the one that resonated with me the most-- Education. Now, you may remember from my earlier post that I regard education as being the cornerstone of America. Without the free flow of ideas and the passing of information, we cannot begin to be the advanced society that we claim to be. Obama's Education section had a couple of key points: "education should not be a luxury", colleges that receive Federal funding should be forced to keep costs low, a proposed new law that would insist that students remain in school until the age of 18, teachers should be given adequate pay and should be rewarded for actually teaching, etc.
I completely agree that education should not be a luxury. The truth of the matter is that the majority of college students cannot afford college. Many drop out because of costs, but most accrue insane amounts of debt. Costs of an education at a private university are virtually unattainable, while even those at public universities are astronomical. The costs continue to rise each year and universities continue to give out just enough in scholarship money to get you there before revealing the truth that your education is going to cost you a fortune. And, as if this problem weren't bad enough, we have a whole host of Americans who will not even have the opportunity to experience college at all because they never graduate high school, as part of a combination of poor teaching and poor parenting.
But, how could all of this happen? Could we actually lower costs of schools through the Federal Government? Yes. As with most laws, if you tie the bill to funding they have no choice but to comply. The thought of keeping costs low would work, as long as Congress manages to take the concept seriously. Raising the drop out of high school age to 18 is a little bit different. Now, don't get me wrong, I think it would be great for the age to be raised (especially because I know so many people who made the life altering decision at 16 to drop out of school, when they couldn't possibly understand the consequences of the action). The problem with the policy is enforcement. While you can raise the age legally, you will never be able to enforce it. Those students who want to drop out will simply not go. Try to hold them and their parents accountable and they'll claim homeschooling. The truth of the matter is raising the drop out age is not going to fix the problem. We need to find out why students drop out.
The second part of the SOTU that should have resonated with any American was the creation of the Financial Crimes Unit, which would basically allow for holding Wall Street accountable. Let's be honest, if there is one thing that we can all agree on, it's that our current financial crisis was created by corporate greed. Obama stressed that all Americans should be playing on a level playing field. Wall Street has spent a great deal of time making sure that this doesn't happen. The creation of this unit would ensure that those who habitually break laws are held accountable. My favorite part of the wall street discussion? Proposing that Congress can no longer make laws governing businesses in which they have a financial stake. It's a step in moving money out of politics. Of course, my concern with this is that Congress will never allow this to happen. They are too happy making sure they have money in their pockets while the rest of America struggles.
Next up? Clean Energy. Now, assuming you read my Keystone Pipeline installment, you know how I feel about this already. It appears as though President Obama feels the same way. We should not sacrifice our nation for a quick fix to our nation's energy problems. We should be focusing our efforts on developing every clean energy source possible. Problem: Washington doesn't want to. Don't believe me? Just look at Gingrich and Romney attack Obama's rejection of the Keystone Pipeline provision. Congress doesn't want clean air, clean energy, clean drinking water, etc. because they can't make nearly enough money off of it. Those of us who want these things are called radicals and socialists, hippies and crazies. My question: when did wanting to breathe easier and drink water that wasn't poisonous qualify you as being crazy?
The last section (not the last section of the SOTU, but the last section I intend to talk about) that particularly hit home for me was the section on immigration reform. I don't know if it has something to do with my current quest to understand my lineage, or that I know immigrants and I know people who want to be immigrants, but have been denied by the U.S. government, but I have a special place in my heart for the immigration issue. For one, I recognize that I am the descendant of both Irish and English immigrants. Secondly, my best friend's husband recently received his citizenship (and is very excited that his first Presidential election is nearing). Last, but not least, a very, very dear friend of mine is in the exact same situation that Obama was discussing. Obama mentioned the anomaly that America has created in that we allow individuals to become educated here and then after they graduate, we send them packing. Doesn't it make sense to allow those who are educated and can become productive members of society the opportunity to stay in this country and become U.S. citizens? Now, I recognize that Obama's section on immigration included more than that, but the truth of the matter is, it mainly spoke to an underlying issue. We are so quick to want to lock people out of this country for whatever reason that we fail to realize that we are denying this country the principles in which it was founded. We are preventing amazing Americans from being American.
Regardless of how you feel about the SOTU address, regardless of whether or not you think it was empty promises, or the kick-off to Obama's campaign, you cannot deny certain truths. Obama's right in his analysis of everything from immigration, to taxes, to education, to the environment. The problem with the SOTU is that the President does not have the power to change the country. He has to work in conjunction with Congress to make things happen. When Congress avoids working, or stonewalls every possible plan for America, it becomes next to impossible for any of these policies to actually be actualized. Many people who saw the SOTU criticized Obama because he hasn't been successful in overcoming the challenges of his presidency and he hasn't been able to put many of the policies he has suggested in past SOTUs into place. That being said, who is really to blame for that? Obama? or Congress?
No comments:
Post a Comment