A "Millennial" Manifesto

Yesterday, I read an opinion piece urging President Obama not to abandon the crucial under-30 voter bloc, the so-called "Millennial" generation that mobilized so much to help get him elected. The theory was that my generation is the most liberal since those that grew up under the New Deal and is unusually politically active for our age group, both of which trends should in theory be key to keeping Democrats in power and keeping Obama's agenda on track (!). On top of all that, we've got arguably the most at stake: it's our tax dollars that will attempt to pay down the massive debt that's growing by the day, ours could be the first generation to grow up with universal health care, and so on and so forth.

That piece motivated me to write something I've been thinking about for a long time, namely my version of what I believe should be the political agenda of the Millenials: what we want from government, what we don't, and how we want our government to look in the 21st Century. Bear in mind that this is coming from a registered Democrat with a strong self-identified independent/conservative leaning. Still, I hope it serves as a reasonable starting point for thinking about where we go from here.

What We Want from Government

1) Moral courage in office: elected officials that take the long view and do what's right for the country instead of what's politically expedient at the moment. Constant election-driven politics in Congress are a big part of the reason for the "deadlock" we're seeing now.

2) A responsible budget. Individuals and states are required to live within their means; surely the federal government could at least make an honest effort to do so. Taking on debt is an important federal power and one that should remain exclusively in the federal purview, but the kind of tax cutting/expenditure binging trend we're on now is unsustainable.

3) Coherent and realistic tax law. Might be progressive, might be flat. That's a task for those with better economics backgrounds than mine. Still, the loopholes, exclusions, credits, and such have got to be taken out, or at least brought under control. There's nothing inherently wrong with tax credits, but there can be too much of a good thing.

4) A realistic plan for the future of health care. It might be time to make universal coverage a reality (it probably is), but we've got to try to get it as right as possible the first time instead of ramming it through via budget reconciliation to make a point. Are the Republicans out of control in their "Party of No" thing? Yes. But they also raise some legitimate points founded in real ideological differences, and those need to be heard and, if possible, respected. As Charles Krauthammer pointed out in his column today, it's fallacious for Obama to argue that Americans support his bill because they like its components. Krauthammer argued that if the government offered a steak to every citizen every Monday, ice cream on Tuesday, Flowers on Wednesday, etc. that everyone would be happy to get the handouts individually, but probably less than thrilled if they could only get them in one big bill that happened to control 1/6th of the economy, added untold zillions to the national debt, and also mandated how the steak should be cooked. That's a fair criticism, and it accurately identifies the underlying issue: contra the GOP, the country is ready for health care. Contra Obama and the Dems, however, we're not ready for health care at any cost.

5) A sensible foreign policy focused on maintaining U.S. power and predominance in the world and keeping the country safe without unnecessarily entanglements. OK, that might be the holy grail of security studies as a field and no one's found the just-right balance yet, but it's probably safe to say that the war in Iraq was a mistake, the war in Afghanistan may have been necessary but should have been prosecuted better, and that the administration's current policy of bending over backwards to accommodate China is absurd. It's crazy first of all because we should never have allowed ourselves to become a Chinese vassal in the first place and also on principle: the President of the United States does not bow--literally (Japan) or figuratively (China)--to anyone. Thankfully, declinism hasn't progressed that far yet.

6) The return of common sense and morality to government. I went to a fascinating lecture by a "renegade" organic farmer last week and one of his take-home points was that human scientific and technological progress has come so far and so fast that we've actually outstripped our own ability to cope with what we're creating. We're creating foods, goods, and ideologies that we simply cannot physically, mentally, or emotionally metabolize. It should be government's role to see the bigger picture and keep the best interests of the citizens at heart, which endorsing things like industrial farming surely is not.

7) A sane re-calculation of the balance between young and old in political influence. Again, it's government's job to give voice to those who don't really have one, and it takes courage to do that (the AARP has a lot more political influence than the average infant). Still, years of kowtowing to the AARP--which is only growing in size and influence as medical technology keeps people alive for such a long time that the population pyramid has been inverted--have played a big part in creating our fiscal imbalances. Medicare and Medicaid need reform, and the savings (and then some) need to be invested in public education and paying down the debt so that my generation and all younger Americans can stand a fighting chance of getting ahead for ourselves, if that's still even a possibility. Mandating downward mobility because no one will stand up to interests like the AARP is, frankly, un-American.

8) Environmental conservation, climate control, and resource management. Unbridled capitalism and self-interest have led to shamefully poor resource management in so many areas, from collapsing fisheries (seriously, enjoy your seafood now) to clear-cut forests to holes in the ozone layer. This stuff doesn't get destroyed overnight, and it takes far, far longer to regenerate--again, if able. If we put the right incentives in place, we could be off of our oft-cited "addiction to foreign oil" in a big hurry. Forget cap-and-trade: taxing polluters until they howl would do some economic damage in the short run but would set the best minds in the country into overdrive to come up with solutions. If we could have our best and brightest work day and night to create the nuclear bomb and the space program, surely we could find today's Einstein of energy solutions to create the bright idea that's going to own the post-petroleum world economy. Cornering that market now will more than pay for itself economically in terms of the short-run damage of the high taxes that created it, to say nothing of the environmental and quality-of-life payoffs to all citizens.

9) Defining a sensible role for a 21st-Century federal government. We could do a lot better than the infamous Washington bureaucracy we've got now, and once again we're just a good dose of spine away from having something better. We need to demand an efficient, meritocratic, bipartisan government that has a clear sense of the long-term national interest both at home and abroad, as well as a clear vision of how to bring that "more perfect Union" to fruition. Government should be limited, but that does NOT mean, as the "Party of No" and especially the Tea Party circus would have it, that the United States should have a little-bitty government with a nominal executive. Weak government and non-intervention led to the current financial crisis and our international position is far too deep-rooted and important to the cause of democracy worldwide for the U.S. to turn to weak, isolationist, "front porch" conservative policies. As plenty of (I think) reasonable conservatives (like Teddy Roosevelt) have noted, it is government's role to referee the marketplace to prevent unfettered capitalism from creating things like mortgage-backed securities bubbles. Like the executive and the legislature, government and the markets must be set in tension with one another: the market has to be free to be as robust and independent as possible, but the government has to ride herd on it at all times, wielding the "big stick" when self-interest gets the better of national interests.

10) Inspirational leadership. It's time to open the doors to intelligence and energy in politics at all levels. Remember how tantalizing the rhetoric of Candidate Obama was? In my opinion, a big part of the reason behind President Obama's flagging popularity is that people saw in him the first truly transformational executive of any of our lifetimes, and his failure to deliver on that promise so far--arguably due in part to the pettiness of the 535 Fools on the Hill that are dead-set opposed to ANY transformation whatsoever because it would mean they would all be seen for the frauds they are--has led to mass disappointment, perhaps even more than the "disillusionment" with his agenda that so many like to point to. America has a long tradition of "City on the Hill" rhetoric (not an unknown phenomenon in Obama's speeches), contending that we're some kind of exceptional example to the world of what liberty and justice for all is supposed to look like. If we're going to hold Tiger Woods to superhuman standards and he's only a golfer, why shouldn't we demand the very best in governmental officials, particularly the President? "Just-folks" is fine at the block party. The President of the United States should be a true "first citizen," a guiding light that shines so brightly that it can provide direction even to the "City on the Hill."

Our End of the Bargain

No 10 points here: this is the (deceptively) easy part. If we're going to demand moral courage and transformative leadership from government, it becomes (as if it ever wasn't) our supreme civic duty to have the moral courage to unfailingly and unflinchingly hold our elected representatives to those ideals. Don't like what they're doing for you? Throw the bastards out--but for real this time. We've been saying that for years; what no one wants to admit is that throwing them all out would require taking responsibility for governing ourselves. As long as we tolerate bloated, self-interested, head-in-cement-syndrome-afflicted leadership, we can point the finger. It's time to start pointing the thumb at ourselves as a polity: Why don't we demand more? Why have we all bought so unquestioningly the biggest bill of goods in American politics, namely that there is some sort of impossibly high bar to entry into our popular government? If that bar is anything other than money, then how in the hell did 90% of our Congressmen and -women clear it? We live in the most advanced democracy on Earth: the barriers to entry aren't really that high at all. Constitutionally, they consist of age, citizenship, and residency requirements. If you're of age (25 for the House), can vote, have been a citizen for seven years (House), and live where you're campaigning, congratulations! You officially have the Constitutional right to "throw the bastards out." Anybody with a plan that hasn't done so yet is letting down their end of the bargain and accepting government that's worse than it could be.

That brings us full circle: in about five years or less, the "Millenials" the Constitutional clock is going to start ticking on the "Millenials." Having the government we wish to have is about to become our responsibility. As an unusually politically-active and--it seems--rationally-minded generation, I can only hope that we as a group take a good look in the mirror, point the thumb at ourselves, and take up the mantle. Our country hasn't been doing right by us. How will we do by our country?