Mood:
brightThis election year has me perplexed. This has nothing to do with political positions either republican or democratic. It has to do with choice. For the first time in many years, I do not have a clear choice. And this makes me wonder why? It even carries me back to when I thought I had a clear choice and yet my choices even then were being decided for me.
In a society such as ours with the freedom to choose, I feel that my freedom has been eroded by the system that we use to select those who are to represent us in the highest offices of our land. Why is it that we have only two choices? Is it because there are only two clear cut choices? No! Should we be at the mercy of only two political parties? If so, why?
I know the standard answers that the republican and democratic parties rule the land by virtue of the power of the people through the electoral process of the votes cast by the people. But is that not turned around now? Is it now not starting at the top instead of from the level where the people participate? The parties give us who will run and assuming that we do not feel comfortable with their choices, we will throw our vote away if we choose to write in or select someone from another party.
The Ross Perot candidacy of the past from the United We Stand party did nothing but give us an elected president without the consent of the majority of the people voting. In other words, the elected person did not receive a majority of the votes cast, but instead won the election on the premise of the Electoral College. The Electoral College -- whatever that is?
My concern is this ... the two ruling parties that we have who govern us ... can not and will not work together to get any thing accomplished. The primary concern today is the not 'reaching across the aisles' to work with competing factions even if what they want to do is good. Instead, our representatives can not be caught helping any one from the other party if they want to be elected again with the nod of the party they represent. Again, the choice of the candidate that is placed before us comes from a party politics and not from the people.
And if we want change, what position can we take to see that change take place. Sure, we can continue to allow ourselves to be ruled by the party that most closely represents our positions, but in the end, it is the party that is in power that wields the ruling vote. And should our party be in control, we do not see change as the competing factions over rule each other or depend upon a President who represents one of the competing parties to veto what gets changed if positions do not match the party they represent.
For example, does anyone who has listened this last week to the 'rah ... rah ... rah' of the oil company executives have the slightest conception that anything is going to change anytime soon if ever with the prices of oil or gas at the pump? They have ranted and raved how they are not in control of the law of supply and demand, yet they are in control of the billions that they have been rewarded in profits. However, over half of them said they did not know how much they earned in salary individually last year. How many of you believed that?
The oil company executives blame China for their heavy demand on the oil that is being produced. Why is China demanding so much oil? Have they got such an economy that requires that much oil and if they do, is their economy so much stronger than ours that they can afford to pay upwards to $200 per barrel (some economists say that oil will be this high by this time next year)?
We have invented a new term for families that wanted to do something with their families this year over the Memorial Day weekend. It is having a 'stacation' instead of a ‘vacation'. In other words because the price of gasoline is approaching $4 per gallon, we have to stay home instead of going to visit grandma or grandpa through this holiday weekend. According to the oil company executives, we are allowing the folks from China to dictate what we can and can not do on our long weekends.
Who is speaking in our behalf? Sure, we get emails about boycotting gasoline for one day and changing the market with the boycott. Not in my lifetime will this happen with a one day boycott. And then we have emails asking us to boycott one oil company and that in some way is going to force the other oil companies to lower their prices. We are governed by the 'golden rule'. He who has the gold – rules.
Then there are the Sean Hannity's of the world that could care less about the price of gas as he plans to use his Escalade as much as he chooses. Why? He has yet to be touched by the escalating costs of gasoline for his Escalade. His income obviously is not affected by the price at the pump yet. When will he be touched ... when gas goes to $10 per gallon or even higher?
Or will the Sean Hannity's ever be touched by their attitude of what the oil companies are doing to the American public. They feel that the oil companies have done enough when they research, drill, refine, and distribute the gasoline to demand the higher prices at the pumps. He blames a congress that does nothing in researching, drilling, refining or distributing gasoline and yet adds a tax on every gallon of gas sold for all the problems of the price of gas at the pump.
Since when has our congress ever been anything but a taxing agency that provides the services needed by our country such as the military, and law enforcement agencies just to mention a few. Granted we also get from the congressmen earmarked ventures where that want to advance their districts not to mention their voting power for the next election. But not all earmarked ventures are inherently evil. Some are for the common good of the community.
Point being, congress is not a producing agent of the gross national product in our country. It was not intended to be and for them to ever venture into that field would place them in direct competition with the fair market place they serve ... not to mention the taxation that would be created should such a venture ever be tried. They instead should be a watchdog over such enterprises as the oil companies and though some might say they are doing their job now by bringing the oil company executives to the table, it is too little too late unless they are going to act responsibly(?).
But with our lack of choice, what can we expect of our watchdogs in the fight? Do they not answer to the big lobbyists dollars and only what is advocated by the conglomerate industries such as the pharmaceutical firms gets passed? I say without reservation, that had the oil companies, for example, wanted to build refineries in the past 35 years, they could have bought their way in with dollars contributed to party campaigns. Say what you want, but they are buying their way into the billions that they are receiving today.
What choice do we have in the matter? First, we are not going to spin this country on a dime. If change is going to happen and change surely must be considered, it is going to take time and a lot of it. Maybe we need an American Party that represents the people. If my age were to allow me, I would pursue such a cause as to start or at least help start an American Party – not to rule and gain my specific position – but to just give me a choice.
Before, someone says that if I get my way with a 3rd party ... what about the next person who wants a 4th party ... well so be it. If the system can sustain 4 or even 8 or more parties then go for it. To be given a choice is the issue. To have to accept issues without being given a choice is the problem. At least 3 or more parties would have to have compromise with each other to do their work.
I grew up in a home with a brother and a sister. From time to time, my brother and I would argue over something we wanted to do and based on the way my sister weighed in, a decision would be made. Other times I or he would weigh in with her and things might be different. It took the art of compromise to be able to get what we wanted done done. Today, all we see is fight, fight, fight and nothing being accomplished.
To have that one sacred facet of choice in our governing process removed from us is to lose a part of ur freedom. Look at the election process we are going through at the moment. Not one party has put forth a candidate that has even the support of their own party much less the support of the American people. Some primaries have actually had 40% of the vote cast for the undecided.
This is what causes people to cry out for a United We Stand party or even possibly as I suggest for an American party. The United We Stand party should not have ceased to exist because Ross Perot pulled his financial support. It was already exceeding a 20% voting power and had someone figured but how to tap into the resources of the people to fund it, Ross Perot's dollars would not have been needed. And it could have possibly been up to a 30 - 35% voting power by now which would have equaled what the other parties share.
Again, I am not advocating any particular party – only another choice other than what we are being given. With at least a 3rd party, we would have another candidate seeking the office of the Presidency of our country and we would have another choice.
Our country as it stands right now is going to face one of the most politicized battles ever fought in America during the conventions. Depending on the outcomes of the conventions, should certain interests not be represented, we are going to see a complete upheaval of our political process. Should someone go to a convention with the most pledged delegates and not come away with the nomination, there is going to be extreme chaos in our land.
The other party has no better position – even with only one candidate supposedly in command of the nomination. Look at the results of the latest primaries and though the candidate is the presumed nominee running unopposed, he still faced a substantial loss of votes by those who are not comfortable with his position.
We are a nation that stands in the need of reevaluation. Romans 13:1-2 (NIV) "1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God”. God says that there is not a power He does not establish. And He does establish all authority, but He allows us to make the decision then He works through the person. Most of the time, the person is not even aware of His presence as was the case with some previous administrations, but He was there. He does not change governments, He changes people and people change governments. He also says that the power of choice is one way of determining His authority. As in the selection of the twelfth apostle after the death of Judas in Acts 1:20-26(NIV) "20 "For," said Peter, "it is written in the book of Psalms, "'May his place be deserted; let there be no one to dwell in it,' and, " 'May another take his place of leadership.' 21 Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22 beginning from John's baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection." 23So they proposed two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. 24Then they prayed, "Lord, you know everyone's heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen 25to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs." 26Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles." Without a choice our participation is at risk.
In the last seven years counting 911 with almost 3,000 innocent people killed in the terrorist attack, we have faced terrible disasters worldwide. There was Katrina with the worst engineering disaster in US history which left approximately 80% of the New Orleans flooded, thousands killed and over 100,000 evacuated. The Tsunami in Indonesia suffered over 130,000 dead and almost 37,000 missing not to mention over 500,000 displaced; recently we have had the cyclone in Myanmar with 78,000 deaths, 56,000 missing and 2.4 million people affected. The earthquake in China warns that the death toll could reach 80,000. What will it take for us to realize that we need to wake up and smell the roses?
2 Chronicles 7:14 (NIV) "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land." Our world needs healing and we need to turn from our wicked ways, seek His face, humble ourselves and pray as only His people can do. But to do this, we are going to have to feel the agony of the entire world. We are no longer just an isolated nation. It is not the 'just us four and no more' concept of a nation with all the resources but leaving out the one main resource – God. It is also a world leaving out GOD.
Our world is being devastated by these disasters and if we can not present a positive witness to them of a stable society based on the most basic freedoms i.e. the freedom of choice whereby our leaders are selected by the people, then the instability that we are experiencing world wide will come to rest at our doors as well. And for that freedom of choice to be ours, we must have choices that we can feel are relevant to our nation, our world, and especially to our God. This election is leaving to many of us in the wake of a dust storm that could turn into a fire storm if we are not going to be a nation of prayer.
God bless ...
Bob Hataway
