America’s Future—A Land Owned by Billionaires and Corporations?

A Land of Opportunity and a Good Life for Everyone?

Robert J. Fischer

Introduction

With the election of Donald Trump as our 47^th President and his plans for America’s future, it is time to evaluate what “America, the Land of Opportunity” meant, what is means today, and what it could be in the future. For many of our ancestors, America was a land of opportunity. But what did that mean? Many immigrants came to this country to find a better life. Economic stability was a goal. Land, housing, food, and an occupation that would allow for a comfortable standard of living were achievable goals. That dream has continued to be the focus of many Americans and new immigrants. As a 3^rd generation descendant of a Swiss immigrant, I know that my grandparents achieved this dream. My parents were also able to offer the same opportunity to me. I have hopefully provided the same for my children. America, since its founding, has become a nation that has grown economically strong. Along with this prosperity, the focus of many of our dreams has changed from wanting our basic needs satisfied to accumulating material wealth. Our government and business leaders view our strength in the Domestic National Product (DNP) reports, where America is number 1 at $29 trillion. But the question might be, is the DNP and our quest for material wealth really what makes a nation great? Can President Trump’s plans make us great again? Aren’t we already the greatest nation if we use the DNP as our measure? Did the average American not know about our country status? In their vote for Donald Trump, many Americans did not feel that the nation was the greatest (MAGA) on Earth!

Other Measures of National Success

Despite the MAGA vote, many Americans often view our nation as one of the greatest. A critical evaluation will show that there are other countries that do a better job with health care, education, and in general, a standard of living. Some other measures where the United States does not fare as well include:

Human Development Index: This index includes life expectancy, education level, and per capital income. In this index, America ranks relatively high with a score of .927 out of 1. The world average is .6. The strength of this index is that it goes beyond domestic national product. The admitted weakness is that it does not consider income inequality, economic opportunities, and health beyond longevity.

Gini Coefficient This statistic measures income inequality. America does poorly on this measure, receiving a score of 39.8 out of a possible 100. Zero means perfect equality in income and 100 means totally unequal. The best score goes to Sweden at 25. It is followed by Japan, then Germany and Canada.

Happy Planet Index This index measures sustainable well-being, considering life expectancy, well-being, inequality, and ecological footprint. America ranks very low on this index at 121 out of 180 countries. The variables that bring our rating down include too many poor people, and a low sense of well-being. Our life expectancy beyond 60 is low, and the percentage of people making less than the median wage is high.

Social Progress Index This index measures social and environmental factors such as basic human needs, foundations of well-being, and economic opportunities. Again, America does not fare well. We are ranked number 25 out of 170 countries. Our scores in the human needs area, well-being, and economic opportunity are low. Countries at the top of the list include Norway, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Iceland, and Switzerland.

Environmental Performance Index This index ranks countries based on their environmental health and ecosystem vitality, using air quality, water resources, and biodiversity measures. On this index, America ranks 43rd out of 180 countries. The variables include our air quality, problems with water quality and resources, and biodiversity. The best performances are the countries of Denmark, United Kingdom, Finland, Malta, Luxembourg, and Austria.

What Makes Americans Happy?

This is a difficult question. While it can be different for everyone, there are some common variables that most Americans value.

Strong Relationships Most Americans put family, friends, and their community high on the list of important things.

Good Health This biological reality is essential to a happy life. The ability to have access to good healthcare, a good diet, and exercise are critical.

Balance Between Life and Work While work had for decades been seen as the most important part of providing a secure future, today many young people seek a balance between their personal life and their work.

Financial Stability A steady job provides the greatest feeling of financial stability. The work pay must be enough to meet basic needs without constant stress over how to make the next payments.

Purpose It is important to most people that they have an identified purpose in life. That purpose allows them to work toward personal goals and gives a sense of accomplishment.

Personal Freedom Americans believe it is important to that we can say what we want without fear of punishment. We need to know that we have free will and while we are free to make choices, there is the realization that there are also consequences.

A Positive Environment We all want to live in a safe community. We strive to have clean and friendly neighborhoods.

A Desire for Leisure As noted above there is a need to balance work with life. Most Americans want to enjoy leisure time, whether it is watching a sporting event, participating in a sporting activity, or engaging in other type of activities such as painting, music, or collecting.

Shared Community and Cultural Values Most Americans want to be part of a community of like-minded individuals. These people share cultural and social values and create a feeling of happiness.

What Can Make America Great Again?

The Trump campaign focused on the desires of the American people. The champaign’s primary focus has been on the increased cost of living, fear of crime, and displacement and unfair treatment caused by uncontrolled immigration. These variables address many of the deficiencies in the American happy dream. The need to address these deficiencies is evident when considering measures beyond the GNP.

It may not be obvious, but it appears that much of the decline in happiness and our low scores on the indices beyond the GNP are the result of policy decisions made following WWII. President Eisenhower, in his final address as President, said to be weary of the military industrial complex. He saw economic growth and power in this military industrial arena. What he likely did not foresee was that big business and wealthy capitalists would eventually replace small businesses and middle-class Americans as the controlling interest in this country. President Nixon took two professions and turned their focus to a business model. What we now have is a for-profit health care system as well as a legal profession where many larger firms care more about their bottom line than justice!

It is obvious that many Americans think longingly about the good old days of individual freedom, economic prosperity, and family. However, the current environment, controlled by the quest for the dollar, has left many Americans struggling to achieve the American dream. The gap between a working-class income and the profits achieved by large corporations and the ultra-rich has become ridiculous. I guess if you believe that President Trump, who has surrounded himself with millionaires and billionaires, will make America great, then I have concerns for your dreams.

America needs policies that control the growth of mega corporations and ask the very rich to contribute to the well-being of the country that has made them wealthy. Pay needs to be improved to allow for a consistent standard of living. Health insurance should be overhauled to reflect the best models in other countries. Education, a foundation of our democracy, must be provided to all without being filled with political and religious mandates. School districts should have equality in funding regardless of their locations.

If we can achieve these few, (but politically complicated) goals, Americans will improve in the non-GNP indices as Americans again realize the value of family, a steady and adequate income, and a sense of belonging to a community that is not threatening, but welcoming.

Is It Time to Rethink Our Method of Democratic Governance?

This is NOT 1776!

Is It Time to Rethink Our Method of Democratic Governance?

This is NOT 1776!

Introduction

For many years I have been concerned about the gridlock in government created by “runaway” political dogmatism. I have also been concerned about the election of Presidents who receive the win through the electoral college, but do not have the support of most voting Americans. Our founding fathers believed in majority rule, and several of them (including Washington, Hamilton and John Adams) cautioned about allowing political parties to have too much power. The system created in the 18^th Century worked for many decades, but it has had its flaws. Today those flaws need to be addressed. The following is a proposal to change parts of the system that may be flawed.

The Electoral College—The Facts

Consider the electoral college and the issue of minority presidencies. There have been forty-six presidents, of which five presidents have been minority presidents—John Quincy Adams, Rutherford B. Hayes, Benjamin Harrison, George W. Bush, and Donald J. Trump. A majority president is the candidate who gets the largest percentage of support from the electorate, not the candidate who gets over 50% of the vote. Each election of a minority president has an interesting story. The election in November 2024 may also produce a minority president.

The system as we know it was a compromise by our founding fathers in 1788. (Prior to 1788 the President was elected by the Congress.) The young nation was clearly a representative democratic republic. A modification of this concept was the compromise between giving the people the vote but keeping the actual election in the hands of electors. The unstated belief was that many voters did not have the knowledge to cast intelligent ballots. Instead, the better educated electors would select the president. Voters would cast ballots for a candidate, but the actual vote would go to the electors who pledged to vote for a specific candidate.

This flawed system has survived despite over 700 attempts to amend this part of the Constitution. Just four years ago, following the January 6 demonstration at the Capitol, a Gallop poll found that 61% of Americans favored abolishing the Electoral College. This raises the question:

Why should we abolish the Electoral College?

First, the Electoral College of the 21^st Century gives too much power to a few “swing states.” Over the years certain states have garnered the reputation of being either Republican or Democratic. For instance, California and Illinois are generally considered to be in the Democratic camp. Texas is seen as Republican. There are eleven states labeled as “swing” states, meaning the vote could go either Republican or Democratic.

A democracy says that each person has a vote. In America there are more than 330 million people. Of that number, 230 million are eligible to vote. The actual turnout has ranged from a low of just over 50% to a high of just over 80%. During the past two elections, turnout has been around 60%. That equates to around 138 million actual votes. Yet only 538 electors actually vote for the president. That is not a good ratio! Even Donald Trump has said, “I would rather see it where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million vote and somebody else gets 90 million votes, and you win”

Why Should We Keep the Electoral College?

On the other hand, a popular vote has its problems. Some voters and areas of the country do not have an equal chance to be heard. There is a belief in a “tyranny of the majority.” There is some merit in the belief that farmers and factory workers might not be heard over the urban demands of those in metropolitan areas. For example, while Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, it is worth noting that she did not win the rural vote. Her popular vote was bolstered by urban areas on the east and west coasts. Perhaps electoral votes should be divided by the percentage of the popular vote that each candidate receives?

In an argument mentioned earlier, the founding fathers were wary of the electorate. They feared an uneducated and uninformed voter. The belief, as expressed by Alexander Hamilton, was that better educated electors would ensure that only qualified individuals would be elected President. Given the current presidential contest, some may question whether Hamilton’s belief is always true!

Congressional Reform

The other issue is a dysfunctional Congress. The current Congress has gotten very little accomplished, primarily due to partisan politics. The ‘party” is more important than the interest of the country. Or perhaps each party believes that only they have the right answer to what is good for the country. John Adams warned early leaders that political parties might one day be a hindrance to good government. Unfortunately, he was correct.

It doesn’t have to be that way. The government established by the founding fathers has stood the test of time. The answer to the gridlock is relatively simple. Each person elected to Congress needs to listen to others’ opinions regardless of party affiliation. A good debater understands both sides of an argument. When this understanding occurs, a middle ground is often discovered.

In researching this piece, I was surprised to learn that the House has been looking at reform for several years. And the Senate has actually enacted reforms. Although, they have not gone far enough to solve the problems. For example, in 1975, the Senate changed the rules on voting to end a filibuster from two-thirds to three-fifths. Later, the exempted judicial and executive branch nominees from filibusters. In the House, the seniority system on committee chairs was replaced by a majority caucus vote. In 2019 the House created a Select Committee on Modernization of Congress, co-chaired by a Republican and Democrat. The purpose of this committee was to bring Congress into the 21^st Century. The Committee mission was renewed in 2021, and the co-chairs established the “Fix Congress Caucus.” The Committee recommended over 200 reforms which have been adopted.

Despite the reforms the idea that Republican and Democrats are enemies has held sway over the past decade. Opposing members are viewed as combatants rather than colleagues. National problems are lost to party politics.

Derek Kilmer, a Democrat and co-chair of the committee, has proposed a way to improve rapport among House members. He has recommended a bipartisan retreat at the beginning of every Congressional session with mandatory attendance. In addition, he has suggested that all committee meetings start with a planning session so that members can begin to trust and respect each other. He hopes that it will allow members to get to know each other as people, not an enemy from some other party. Unfortunately, Representative Kilmer is retiring!

Kilmer’s proposed plan is perhaps impossible, as most recent House and Senate leaders seem to think their job is to keep the parties apart so that there is a clear distinction between goals. This is an important election strategy. Recent leadership seems to prove this point.

Conclusions

Both problems can be solved. However, the will of the people must be more forceful than it is today! Unfortunately, our founding father’s concern over the lack of an informed electorate is still an issue today. Many Americans either fail to take an interest in learning about political issues, or only listen to a very focused and small number of information sources. An amendment to the Constitution to change the Electoral College system is only possible when Americans vote for representation who want this to happen, and then casts ballots at state elections to support the amendment. The dysfunction in Congress should be viewed the same way. Americans need to recruit and elect people who share their values. Political parties shouldn’t be making the selections. This year’s election cycle is representative of voters focused on a small number of biased sources which are working to make their candidate your choice!

Thoughts from the Middle

It’s Not the Age, It’s the Character that Counts

Robert James Fischer

We all age differently. Some have arthritis, others can still play pickleball at 85. Age isn’t really a factor in politics. If cognitive abilities remain, other physical diminishments really are of little consequence. And even with slowed cognitive abilities, good decisions can be made. But, considering all the information that an older person has gathered, it sometimes takes extra time to retrieve specific information.

On the other hand, character is something that is well defined before the end of our teen years. People who do not develop accepted societal values will likely not develop them as they age. In practice, those people learn how to mask their weaknesses. They often become con artists or are involved in other non-socially unacceptable behavior. Moral people tend to continue to care for others. They use their strong societal values to improve society rather than looking to their own needs.

Why does this matter in the political arena? Over the years, history has shown that those who have served our country with policies that have improved life for our people have been persons with strong positive values— Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, Lincoln, T. Roosevelt, F. Roosevelt, J. Kennedy, Obama and Biden, to name only a few. On the other hand, some who have served did not possess the character to sacrifice their own well-being for our nation. They were more interested in serving their own interests—for example, Burr, A. Johnson, Harding, Agnew, Nixon, and now Trump. Thankfully, a much shorter list!

History does teach us lessons if we would only pay attention. Not that long ago the presidency of Richard Nixon taught a nation a hard lesson on personal greed. Many Americans are too young to remember the Watergate scandal and the treachery behind Nixon’s desire for power. There are many similarities between Tricky Dick and Donald Trump. America needs to understand that persons like Nixon and Trump may make grand statements about their love of America, but they are only using citizens to maintain power and stroke their own egos. As a recent pundit remarked. There are millions of Americans who are in need. They are looking for someone to lead them out of poverty. Person’s such as Nixon and Trump prey on this desire and promise a better way. They want your vote to maintain their own power and stroke their ego.

In the coming months Americans will need to decide whether or not character counts. History tells us that it does. In November don’t let the false belief that age is a problem cloud your judgement. Biden may be a few years older than Trump. But they are both old men! The real choice is about character. Who has shown a love of country and an ability to compromise? Remember that Biden was friends with John McCain! Who cares more about their own ego and maintaining power? Consider the fact check that Trump’s own cabinet and vice president don’t want him back in office.

The choice is clear!!