Election 2012: The most important of my lifetime

Election 2012 is heating up on several fronts, from Minnesota’s “Marriage Amendment” to the Great Debates. At age 55, I’ve witnessed and analyzed far too many of these shows, but I’m willing to claim that this is the most important of my lifetime.

Four key ingredients are making this so:

1. Minnesota’s “Marriage Amendment” is the civil rights issue of a generation.
2. President Barack Obama vs. Republican challenger Mitt Romney.
3. A second state constitutional amendment question: Voter ID.
4. Glenn Gruenhagen (but he’s going to take up an entire second blog by himself) 

If I haven’t bored you yet, you likely qualify as a bona fide politico wonk (or maybe a family member).  But those of you who truly know and understand me know that progressive politics runs deep in my veins, and community journalism never leaves the soul.  Put the two together and you know one has to blog a little about this November 6 election and the meaning to all this madness.

Minnesota’s “Marriage Amendment”

A facebook friend of mine recently posted this on her page: “I am dead serious when I say, if you are voting YES for the marriage amendment, delete me as a friend. Now.”

I would never go that far, but I’m close. There is so much wrong with this hurtful and discriminatory amendment that one should be able to think outside the box or the Bible’s Old Testament ways to muster up a NO vote.  I can understand if one’s traditional religious views are so deeply rooted in one’s core value system that it becomes difficult to separate from one’s political position.  But this amendment proposal is also bad politics and public policy.

Never has there been such a generational split on a key public policy issue.  Younger voters will overwhelmingly cast NO votes on this “Marriage Amendment,” while votes will shift toward YES as demographics turn older. A generation from now, as GLBT rights become even more commonplace and widely accepted in our society, this issue will appear similar to the women’s suffrage movement which produced the 19^th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1920 allowing women to vote or the Civil Rights Movement of the ‘50s and ‘60s for African-Americans.

Love comes in many shapes and sizes. And good parenting doesn’t necessarily mean only a man and a woman.  To deny those who love each other the right to marriage or to even suggest that children will better flourish in a traditional husband-wife household simply seems wrong and discriminatory in today’s society.  Supporters on both sides of the aisle may twist figures to suit their cause; but common sense must prevail on this one.  Good, loving relationships make for good parents.  Good parenting is good parenting.

It’s the Bible and religion which makes this issue different. And that is a difficult argument to counter and argue against for many conservative Christians.  But not all are, and when a public policy issue like this enters the political arena, it also becomes an issue of freedom – both of individual rights and religious freedom. Or even the freedom to not be religious. And I simply find it the height of hypocrisy for a Republican party, which prides itself on advocating limited government, supporting amendments which suppress personal freedoms.

Finally, don’t clutter the Minnesota Constitution.  We should never impose a majority vote to constitutional frameworks. 

Obama vs. Romney

President Obama and GOP challenger Mitt Romney seem like polar opposites.  They’re not, and the reality remains that little will change no matter who wins the presidency, unless congressional gridlock loosens up. 

But despite Romney’s damaging “47%” comments, this race appears close.  It’s amazing to me.  And it speaks broadly of a U.S. electorate which has grown more intolerable toward others.  This era of “personal responsibility” sounds good and makes for easy sound bites, but the real world it ain’t.

America has always taken care of its neediest citizens.  And it should.  It seems easy to criticize this nation’s welfare system; yet, the majority of “welfare” programs are dedicated to our elderly, especially those in nursing homes.  It is easy to point fingers at illegal immigrants; but this finger-pointing too often profiles and labels legal immigrants, as well, and doesn’t point a firm enough finger at businesses who want and need cheap labor or an American citizenry that won’t work such jobs.

I, too, have been disappointed in Obama’s first term on several fronts.  But it’s hard to dispute he inherited a horrible mess from the George W. Bush administration: Two wars without proper dedicated funding and an historic economic downturn prompted by the housing crash and Wall Street greed. And the Obama administration has little to nothing to do with a world economy which has also slowed dramatically.

It seems a simple choice to me.  And that’s what makes me uneasy.  For a Romney presidency, especially on  taxation and foreign policy, scares me.

The Voter ID Amendment

This effort has been all about politics.  Rampant voter fraud is an urban myth brought on by the most recent close election calls, both going the Democrats’ ways (Mark Dayton over Tom Emmers for Minnesota governor and Al Franken over Norm Coleman for U.S. Senate).

Voter fraud is rare and inconsequential in determining electoral winners.  But limiting fair access to Minnesota’s polling places appears unconstitutional on the surface and just darn stupid.  It will make it more difficult for the elderly who no longer hold picture IDs and those of college age, who often hold multiple residences.  It could easily disenfranchise these voters, make it more difficult for them to register and, thus, marginalize their voting experience.  Both groups, not coincidentally, are more apt to vote Democratic.

And this change would cost Minnesota cities and counties a hunk of change to implement.

Again, a Republican party that promotes limited government wants to impose a government-certified picture ID? Nuts.  While many citizens see this as a simple issue (as in, “Everyone citizen should have a picture ID. What’s the big deal?”), it isn’t.  It’s making an issue out of a non-issue.  And very, very political.  There are many key issues this political season.  Voter ID shouldn’t have been one of them.