The Team Mentality in American Politics

Posted: November 5, 2013 in Political Independent, Two-Party System, Unaffiliated
Tags: , , , ,
0

    Americans tend to be a little scrappy. Like most countries, we like our sports. We are great at choosing sides and pledging our allegiances. Once we choose a team, we are tenacious in our loyalty. When our team is down, we grouse, lick our wounds and fight for a victory next time. When our team is winning, we rejoice, knowing all is right with the world, and occasionally (or more than occasionally), we gloat. We are not “fair weather fans.” We bleed when our team bleeds, we cringe when our team fumbles or fouls, and we are beyond elated with our team’s victories. Studies have shown that entire cities of football fans eat more junk food when their teams lose. We defend our team and feel personally attacked when anyone points out our team’s weaknesses or flaws (or makes fun of our players or their mothers). We proudly wear our team colors.

    Unfortunately, we behave the same way in regard to American politics. The two-party system promotes a choice between two imperfect “teams.” (We have been historically well-behaved sheep in this regard, making our team choices even when they are ill-fitting.) The entire country has chosen sides and those sides proudly wear their Red or Blue; we defend our chosen team at all costs, even when it directly opposes what we think of as our values. Republicans spent a lot of money? Democrats started a war? Somehow, we only remember our values — strongly — when the other team violates them. If our chosen team does something we dislike, we remain silent, as if our child committed a petty crime that we can’t quite face. We refuse to see the good in the other team, and blame for every ill can easily be laid on the “enemy’s” shoulders.

red_vs_blue

    How is it that half the country is inherently “evil” and “stupid,” while the other half (our half) is “enlightened” and “responsible” and “good?” Sorry, folks, the world of black and white only exists in childhood and in fiction. As adults, we should recognize that every issue is grey and three-dimensional. Granted, trying to find facts about any issue is now tougher than ever, since few sources present fact without bias. But we don’t seem to mind. As die-hard fans, we like our news tinted Red or Blue. “My team’s preferred news sources don’t *feel* biased,” say the fans. “The other team’s sources, however, not only invent news but they are also evil.”

    Somehow, the meaning of an election victory has also fundamentally shifted. Winning an election is now translated to mean “mandate.” More clearly stated, the last few Presidents have interpreted this to mean “my team’s agenda is backed by the will of the American people.” Suddenly, a divided country supports all of one party’s agenda? When did this interpretation start? Politicians must realize that a jump from one party to the other is a fundamental shift away from one extreme; the old party was too far right or too far left, and the country is making a “correction.”

One of the best quotes I have ever seen about American politics is from a 2011 article in The Atlantic: “Ours is a system focused not on collective problem-solving but on a struggle for power between two private organizations.” (The entire article is excellent, I highly recommend it. Read it here.) They’ve duped us into investing heart, soul and loyalty to one side of a war. They have no intention of coming together to fix anything.

The most difficult part to fathom from an independent standpoint is how each party allows its candidate/representative/President behavior or policy “passes” that would be loudly protested if made by the opposing party. Affairs, financial corruption or involvement in war seems to be excusable (or at least explainable) from our own but is reprehensible and unforgivable from the other side, serving as political ammunition in this ongoing battle. This is nothing more than “wearing the team colors,” OWNING that candidate/representative/President to the point that defending this “team member” is an extension of defending ourselves. Maybe we can call it “Party Blindness.” Studies have shown that political bias can even affect our ability to do math.  We spin everything to put our team in the best light. After all, we can make excuses and arguments for any behavior from our candidate, and against anything from the other side.

ENOUGH.

Our political system was designed to promote collaborative problem-solving. Instead, we are so angry when “our side” compromises at all. “It’s our way or nothing!” shout both sides of the stadium, vehemently screaming while spittle and bile flies. This is the partisan hell that WE, as a nation, have built. As I said, we are die-hard fans. We will go to the grave waving our team colors. These teams, however, have agendas other than “the fans’” best interests. Keeping unions, corporations, lobbyists and special interests happy and getting re-elected are these teams biggest priorities.

Awake

Election season brings out much wooing of the Independent Voter. After all, the Die Hards vote party line (no decision required!). We, the Independents, are the ones who actually make the decisions on Election Day. This is a big responsibility for a group that is not represented by these parties. We hear rhetoric full of words like “collaboration” and “change” and “teamwork.” On election night, the winning candidate promptly forgets the Independent voters and declares a Blue or Red “mandate.” Independents are then completely ignored until next election season.

The tide, however, is turning.

In this game of political teams, Red vs. Blue, Independents have traditionally acted as referee, able to tip the scales one way or the other. This is a quickly-changing political climate, and Independents are not the minority we once were. We are now approximately 42% (and growing). This referee now has the power to call foul, eject all players and cancel the traditional game. Independents demand COLLABORATION. We demand RESULTS. We demand an atmosphere free from corruption, political theater and hate.

Some Independent words for the donkey-wearing Blue Team and the elephant-wearing Red Team:

1. More and more of us are sick and tired of this game and the teams involved.

2. Remember that “election victory” does not mean “mandate.” It means that Independents chose your candidate as the “least worst,” which is hardly a mandate.

3. Continue this behavior, and your base will consist of only the extremists of your parties. The rest will join the ranks of the disgruntled Independents, and we are large enough and angry enough to unite and overthrow this Red and Blue Duopoly.

I have always thought as a political independent, but at one time, I was a member of one of the parties. I remember the dread of seeing My Party or My President skewered on the news, and the glee of watching the Other Party skewered. Once I became an Independent and took off my fan colors for good, my viewpoint changed. I still had one toe in each party, but I was able to take the emotion out of it. I stopped “rooting” for my team to “win.”  I was able to see that the world of politics is not black and white, and that grey is okay. There is a lot of work to do, and we cannot do it by focussing on the Red and the Blue.

Do yourself a favor. If neither of these two teams defines you, step away. Take off your team colors, set them aside and view this game as a referee with new, Independent eyes.  Take a breath before making visceral, emotional responses and see what the facts reveal to you. View the activities and the words of these parties and see the rhetoric for the political theater it is. Listen to news stories with an ear for fact, and you will hear the biases that you didn’t recognize before. Try to view our American political animal without any personal “skin in the game,” with emotion benched on the sideline. If you succeed, you’ll be surprised (and possibly energized) by the view. I promise.

Changing the Way We Think about Government Spending

Posted: September 26, 2013 in Fiscal Responsibility, Government Spending, Taxes
1

      As a country, the U.S. has behaved like the proverbial 18-year-old college student with access to too many credit cards — we want it, we can’t afford it, but we get it, anyway. Damn the money, that is what debt is for. We can worry about that another day. Until the next time, and the next, and then there is an emergency… (Before any finger-pointing begins, both parties, even the “small government” Republicans, are equally guilty of overspending.)

If we each brought our bag of taxes to Washington personally, we might be more invested in what is done with it.

If we each brought our bag of taxes to Washington personally, we might be more invested in how it is spent.

    Read any political article today and you can find a million ways to talk about money: taxes, subsidies, funds going to programs domestically and causes overseas in amounts we can’t fathom. We can’t fathom them, so we don’t. After all, it is just government money, and the government has access to A LOT of money.

    It is time to stop, take a breath and change how we think about government spending.

    Consider how individuals and families think about their money, their budgets, their income, their debt, their savings. This is a very personal, sometimes emotional and stressful, topic. Is there enough money? How can the budget be stretched? If there is a new or unexpected expense, how do we accommodate it? Do we cut somewhere or go into debt?

    It is very difficult for anyone to think about a government budget with the same concern, the same personal consideration one would give to a personal budget, but I think this is where we must try.

    We all pay our taxes. For the middle class, these taxes are significant in proportion with our “living money,” or the amount of income we actually get to spend on living. Once this money leaves our paychecks or our checking accounts, it goes into the great, enormous pile of money in Washington and/or our state capitols. We largely forget about it, other than vague desires to spend the pile one way or another, or to NOT spend it. The “personal” side of the money is gone. Well, what if it wasn’t? What if your taxes stayed in a bundle with your name on it and so did everyone else’s?

    The average 4-person family in the U.S. makes $67,019/year. Average EFFECTIVE tax rate paid by middle class Americans is 12.9%.  So let’s assume, after standard deductions, that the average 4-person family pays around $6,220 in taxes per year. (This is Federal taxes only. Remember, this same family also pays plenty of other taxes: property taxes — either directly as homeowners or indirectly as renters — sales tax, state income tax, payroll taxes including Social Security and Medicare tax, gas tax, motor vehicle tax, etc. We will keep it simple and discuss only Federal income tax.)  So let’s use this as our standard of measure:

    $6,220 = One family’s Federal income taxes for one year

Let’s look at the retirement pension for a Congressperson who served for 20 years, which is an average of $70,620. That Congressperson is receiving the entire amount of more than 11 families’ taxes for the year, every year, to be retired. If they receive this pension for 15 years, they are taking 171 families’ taxes, to be retired. So your family, and my family, and 169 other families bundled up our hard-earned money, wrapped it up with our names on it and sent it to this Congressperson to enjoy during their retirement. This Congressperson is no longer contributing to the system in any way, and this is only one of the 280 Congresspersons getting this average amount! And our money, mine and yours and 169 other families, is not going toward roads or infrastructure or medical research or paying down the debt or doing any good at all.

    Need another example?

    In 2012, the U.S. Department of Agriculture paid out $20.3 million in 239 different Farm Subsidy OVERPAYMENTS (as in, at least 50% over the amount that was due). (More info about farm subsidies and why both parties dislike them here and here.) That is the equivalent of 3,264 families’ taxes, wasted on overages. To add a little more sting, farms owned or partially owned by three members of Congress received subsidies totalling $7.6 million over a 13 year period. So those members of Congress, who are already receiving

taxpayer money as salary and stand to gain a congressional pension, also accepted the Federal income taxes of 1,222 families in the form of farm subsidies. One thousand, two hundred and twenty-two families’ money. And (last one, I promise) the Department of Agriculture sent out $22 million in farm subsidy payments to 3,400 policyholders who had been dead more than two years. That is equal to the Federal taxes of 3,536 4-person families. That is like taking the Federal taxes of an entire town. Yours, mine, all your neighbors, all your extended family, all the families at your job, all the families whose kids go to the same school as your kids or your grandkids, all your closest friends and double that. Or triple or quadruple it. All those people and their families carefully packed their $6,220 and sent it to the Department of Agriculture, to send to people who have been dead for two years or longer.

Is it personal yet?

    How would it feel to work hard all year to pay your taxes only for it to go to something wasteful or something equally useless? Wouldn’t you want to protest and say: “I’d like my money to DO something! I worked for it, please don’t waste my hours away from my family!”

    This is the way we need to start thinking about the way government spends money. I will discuss money from now on translated into “# of families’ annual taxes.” Some may argue that corporations pay taxes, and so do the wealthy, and do we really care how THEIR money is spent? Truthfully, it is ALL our money. When you buy an Apple product, you are helping Apple pay its corporate taxes. When you buy a Microsoft product, you are contributing to Bill Gates’ wealth. Financially, we are all connected and we need to start taking ownership of the way our money is being spent.

    Many people and organizations like to tackle an issue and ignore the money side. After all, this Next New Idea is amazing and we will all love it and benefit! The money? Well, it is pretty expensive and with our current debt picture, it might be tough. But that will work itself out somehow. Right? The truth is, nothing in this country gets done without your money and my money and your sister’s family’s money and your kids’ future earnings and maybe the money you wanted to leave your kids. It is easy to ignore this and charge ahead spending. Don’t we all know That Guy who buys a lot on credit, feels no obligation toward that debt once he has his hands on the new Porsche or bling or extravagant vacation, and continues to buy more without looking back? We need to change this mindset and make every single political decision based on the fact that we are using OUR money. You may be very conservative with your own money and budget but feel government money works differently. It doesn’t.

In order for the government to be good stewards of your money (and mine), it needs to make some serious changes and we, as voters and taxpayers, need to insist on it. It needs to function within a budget. Avoid adding debt. Intelligently cut wasteful spending. Pay down the debt we have. In other words, make no moves, pass no policy, unless it makes fiscal sense. Can we afford it? If not, we can’t have it. Passing policy first and then scrambling for more income to pay for it makes no sense. When individuals do things like this, they become mired in unsustainable debt and likely move on to bankruptcy, where the taxpayers pick up the tab. Individuals (usually) have no way to drastically increase income unless they take on a second job. If the U.S. government was a person, “Sam” would need to run out and get 7 more jobs.

Enough is enough. Smaller, less expensive government is the only way out of our mess. It is called “fiscal responsibility,” and it is possible. We need to start today.

The Smith Family Taxes: $6,220

The Smith Family Taxes: $6,220