With less than 18 months until the Democrat and Republican parties choose their nominees for President, some announced candidates are already trying to make a splash
Paying for the Crimes of Your Ancestors
The political race for President in 2020 is already heating up. There are already twenty or so Democrats who have announced they are running. Among those is Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ). In such a crowded field everyone is trying to separate themselves show how they are different. Booker, however, is already showing signs of desperation.
Last week Booker introduced a bill to Congress that would pay reparations for slavery. Setting aside the several obvious points, including fact that the bill proposes to violate international law which prohibits family members (in this case family members generations past) to pay for the crimes of others, Booker surely can’t think there is any chance of the bill passing.
Introducing such a radical proposal is an odd step in the middle of a campaign. He has to know that, from a political standpoint, would single-handedly keep him from winning a general election. Even in the Democratic primaries, such a stance would not win a majority of voters. Obviously, it might find support in the African-American voting block but how much support is a question and that constituency is still a minority within the Party.
Unless Booker has the worst political advisors and campaign manager there is, he seems to have already concluded that he is a long shot with very little chance and has to start throwing up ‘Hail Marys” already, a year before the primaries start.
Medicare for All
As could be expected, another Senator running for President and self-described socialist Bernie Sanders has introduced a bill for a government run health system, so called ‘Medicare for all’. Four other of his colleagues in the Senate who are running for President have co-sponsored the legislation.
To pay for the estimated $33 trillion cost over ten years, Sanders proposes (among other things) to increase tax rates on upper income brackets to 70%–meaning top earners would keep less than a third of what they earn.
Every time such ideas are floated, Thinking Man can’t help but wonder why, if the people proposing them feel so strongly and claims it’s about ‘principle’ they aren’t already doing what they want done? Especially in the case of a person who claims to be a socialist—socialism being founded, after all, by Karl Marx and the philosophy of “from each according to their ability (to pay)….” Bernie Sanders is in the top 8% of income earners in the nation. Almost all of his co-sponsors make even more than that. Yet, if Sanders feels so strongly, why does he have to wait for the government to force him to give money to help others pay for health care? Why doesn’t he just do it himself-now? After deductions, Sanders pays an effective tax rate of less than 20% and givers roughly 8% of his income to charitable causes. So for sake of argument, let’s say those combine are a third of his income. Why doesn’t he donate more to charity, specifically those that provide medical care and services to low income people. There are hundreds of not for profit hospitals, many of which are in inner cities. There are blood banks, organizations that support wounded veterans, charities for the disabled and physically challenged, community organizations everywhere that provide assistance for medical care in addition to organizations such as the American Cancer Society or the Juvenile Diabetes Association that not only support research but help families afflicted with medical bills because of the ravages of disease.
Some of us do exactly those things. Some who make much less than Sanders and give much more than he does, as a portion of income. And it’s done voluntarily because those who do feel compassion and don’t have to be forced by the government to do it. Sanders could personally do what he’s asking the government to force him to do. He just has chosen not to.